Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ptsfa!well!mjr
From: mjr@well.UUCP (Matthew Rapaport)
Newsgroups: comp.databases
Subject: Re: Network vs. Relational DBMSs
Message-ID: <4881@well.UUCP>
Date: 2 Jan 88 04:30:18 GMT
References: <2550@sfsup.UUCP> <495@hscfvax.harvard.edu>
Reply-To: mjr@well.UUCP (Matthew Rapaport)
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link, Sausalito, CA
Lines: 10

In article <495@hscfvax.harvard.edu> pavlov@hscfvax.harvard.edu (G.Pavlov) writes:
>In article <2550@sfsup.UUCP>, prj@sfsup.UUCP (P.Jayne) writes:
> There aren't a lot of defenders of pre-relational DBMSs out there it seems.
Implicit in this argument is the mistaken supposition that what is 
currently "out there" representing relational DBMSs in real products is
all there is to the relational model!  Consider that the BEST such
products implement only 50% of the model.  Before too much criticism,
it would be best to learn what the model really provides for, and ask
why vendors have never provided it!

Matthew Rapaport mjr@well [ptsfa!well!mjr]