Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!mandrill!hal!ncoast!allbery From: allbery@ncoast.UUCP (Brandon S. Allbery) Newsgroups: comp.databases Subject: Re: Data vs Application oriented design Message-ID: <7086@ncoast.UUCP> Date: 16 Jan 88 00:16:38 GMT References: <12673@pyramid.pyramid.com> <69@coot.AUSTIN.LOCKHEED.COM> Reply-To: allbery@ncoast.UUCP (Brandon Allbery) Followup-To: comp.databases Organization: Cleveland Public Access UN*X, Cleveland, Oh Lines: 21 [We haven't seen the line-eater since we sent Minnifield and Dixon after it!] As quoted from <69@coot.AUSTIN.LOCKHEED.COM> by chris@AUSTIN.LOCKHEED.COM (Chris Wood): +--------------- | applications. It is entirely possible to build a CODASYL database design | that does not use the dreaded "imbedded pointers" and is just a set of | (dare I say it) relations that are unrelated. True, now you have lost much | of the power of the DBMS, but look how easy it is to reorganize! | | Thus it follows that the Relational model is a SUBSET of the network model. +--------------- No argument. Isn't Unify a direct example of this? -- Brandon S. Allbery, moderator of comp.sources.misc {well!hoptoad,uunet!hnsurg3,cbosgd,sun!mandrill}!ncoast!allbery PS/2: Half a computer. OS/2: Half an operating system for half a computer. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ATTENTION!! Please do not send mail to ncoast through necntc. This applies to all mailing lists and all mail not directed to comp.sources.misc. Thank you. (This message provided by myself and Jeff Janock .)