Re: Why relational division is so uncommon?
- From: Vadim Tropashko <vadimtro_invalid@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 26 Apr 2007 18:15:30 -0700
On Apr 26, 3:22 pm, "V.J. Kumar" <vjkm...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Vadim Tropashko <vadimtro_inva...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote innews:1177607284.813162.87940@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:
This is an interesting observation as well. Consider a medical
database schema:
PatientSymptom (
name string,
symptom string
)
'Symptom
string' is an ugly hack to emulate relational division for the original
table you've specified below.
I think the misunderstanding here is the "string" which is a datatype.
I should have written "varchar2(100)". Ugly but not ambiguous.
.
- References:
- Re: Why relational division is so uncommon?
- From: paul c
- Re: Why relational division is so uncommon?
- From: Vadim Tropashko
- Re: Why relational division is so uncommon?
- From: V.J. Kumar
- Re: Why relational division is so uncommon?
- Prev by Date: Re: Why relational division is so uncommon?
- Next by Date: Re: Why relational division is so uncommon?
- Previous by thread: Re: Why relational division is so uncommon?
- Next by thread: Re: Why relational division is so uncommon?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|