Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!uunet!tellab5!chinet!dhartung
From: dhartung@chinet.chi.il.us (Dan Hartung)
Newsgroups: comp.databases
Subject: Re: Relational Databases
Message-ID: <1991Jun09.221457.10619@chinet.chi.il.us>
Date: 9 Jun 91 22:14:57 GMT
References: <6822@vela.acs.oakland.edu> <1991Jun07.063749.7904@chinet.chi.il.us> <1991Jun08.124337.29813@uvmark.uucp>
Organization: Chinet - Chicago Public Access UNIX
Lines: 24

jim@uvmark.uucp (Jim Todhunter) writes:
>
>Just a minor correction to this posting.  A relational database does NOT
>need to be normalized.  In fact, some of the most interesting current
>research is the area of NFNF (non first normal form) relational models.
>This is a very active area of investigation because there are serious
>deficiencies in the first normal form model.  While Codd dismisses NFNF
>and OO model out of hand, most others, including Date, do not share his
>view.  (It is interesting to note that CODD's recent book reads very much
>like a dinosaur's defense of his raison d'etre.)  NFNF models can also use
>indices.  The truth is normalization is merely a convenience for that
>database theorist, making the mathemetical proofs easier.
>
Thanks -- this is very interesting.  I wish I had more of the math background
(I come to computers from English lit!); I know just enough to get myself
in trouble.  :-)  I think Codd is very amusing and slices & dices some
of his opponents effectively, but I wish he were more open to other
avenue of discussion.

-- 
Daniel A. Hartung           |  "What's the difference anyway, between being
dhartung@chinet.chi.il.us   |  safe and being rad, the joke's on us, we've
Birch Grove Software        |  all been had."  -- John Wesley Harding
-----------FoxPro Programmer Looking For Work--------------