Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!ll-xn!mit-eddie!bloom-beacon!gatech!purdue!i.cc.purdue.edu!j.cc.purdue.edu!pur-ee!pur-phy!mrstve!mdbs!greg From: greg@mdbs.UUCP (Greg Feldman) Newsgroups: comp.databases Subject: Re: Database Company Contacts Message-ID: <844@mdbs.UUCP> Date: 25 Feb 88 23:04:16 GMT Reply-To: greg@mdbs.UUCP (Greg Feldman) Organization: Micro Database Systems, Inc., Lafayette IN Lines: 45 > >In article <33672UH2@PSUVM>, UH2@PSUVM.BITNET (Lee Sailer) writes: >> In article <823@mdbs.UUCP>, kbc@mdbs.UUCP (Kevin Castleberry) says: >> > >> >MDBS III (a post-relational high performance dbs) >> ~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~ >> | >> What does this mean? >> > > >Like the term relational, post-relational is used by marketing types >to mean a lot of different things. Often, it is used to refer to >some sort of semantic data model which can directly express >relationships and constraints difficult to express using just the >constructs of the relational data model. I would consider that ^^^^^^^^^^^ True. Another reason for the term is the network design came after the relational design. Frankly, I use the term "extended-network". To me that better conveys the meaning "we have things (recursive sets, forked sets, many-to-many sets) that CODASYL networks don't". By the way, MDBS had to come up with both these terms (post-relational, extend network) because when we invented MDBS III, they didn't exist :-). >to be an appropriate use of the term. In the case that you ask about, . . . > >In spite of the abuse of terminology, MDBS has very high quality >products for certain situations. ^^^^^ Appreciate that :-). >They are primarily aimed at the application developer. They decided >to provide high functionality at the expense of 'friendliness.' >-- >Roger Alan Pick - QA & Information Systems Department, University of Cincinnati Greg Feldman--MDBS (317) 448-6187 UUCP: {rutgers,ihnp4,decvax,ucbvax}!pur-ee!mdbs!support Note: "These are my opinions, who else would come up with this?"