Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!ukma!psuvm.bitnet!uh2
From: UH2@PSUVM.BITNET (Lee Sailer)
Newsgroups: comp.databases
Subject: Re: relational technology flames
Message-ID: <28875UH2@PSUVM>
Date: 6 Jan 88 15:39:22 GMT
References: <2557@sfsup.UUCP>
Organization: Penn Sate Erie--School of Business
Lines: 15

One factor in the change from Network to Relational approaches is that
new ideas from R migrate "backwards" to N approaches.  For example, an
emphasis on keeping the logical and physical levels separate, or
implementing entities that are more or less in 3NF.  Because these ideas
have been accepted by N users, the need to convert to R systems is less
crucial.
     
I think this parallels the use of *structure* in COBOL programs, for
example.  Much of what is good about structured, top-down, stepwise
refinement approaches to programming and design is easier to TEACH in
Pascal, say, but can be used by programmers in any language.  Likewise,
the reasons that Codd (to name just one) gives to justify design
decisions in the R model can often times be used by N model implementors
to improve their systems.