Re: Trying to define Surrogates

"Brian Selzer" <brian_at_selzer-software.com> wrote in message news:760Gg.9898$1f6.4300_at_newssvr27.news.prodigy.net...
> I've changed my position. I just had a revelation that the need for key
> stability is a symptom of the problem, not the problem itself. I still
> think that the model has a problem, but the root cause has nothing to do
> with how stable a key is: rather, it is that there isn't a mechanism
defined
> in the model to correlate tuples during an update. I posted in the other
> thread the line of thinking that led to this revelation, but I'm going to
> repost, so that others who are not following that thread can comment. I'm
> going to use the subject "Relation Schemata vs. Relation Variables" if
you'd
> like to follow it.

The minute you start "correlating tuples" instead of correlating the things the data describes you are starting down the path of reducing the RDM to the GDM. (graph data model). Tuples aren't correlated. Data items are. Received on Mon Aug 21 2006 - 14:42:18 CEST