Re:Easy Steps to a Complete Understanding of SQL
by chris_wot on Tuesday September 03, 2013 @11:17AM
(#6321418)
Are you criticising the relational model, or SQL? You seem to be contradicting yourself with your own language, which you claim works well with relational databases (ergo, works well with the relational model).
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Easy Steps to a Complete Understanding of SQL
by clarkevans on Tuesday September 03, 2013 @11:26AM
(#6321463)
The relational query model (it's operators and set algebra) is a poor fit for common business inquiries. I view SQL as a practical syntax for encoding relational queries; SQL has deviated from the pure model when the model failed to address a real world business problems. I see SQL as a success, in that it works and applies the relational model to real world concerns.
What is intuitive to users is the idea of related files/tables, and this really doesn't have much to do with the relational algebra. While we have implemented HTSQL using SQL, this is an implementation choice -- our experiment is syntax/semantics, we didn't want to be in the business of data storage and query optimization, and, we use (the incredibly awesome) PostgreSQL. HTSQL's logical query model depends upon is a tabular based abstract storage.
Re:Easy Steps to a Complete Understanding of SQL
by chris_wot on Tuesday September 03, 2013 @11:34AM
(#6321518)
Oh, the relational query model based on relational algebra! I thought you wrote "relational model".
For what it's worth, a join is indeed part of relational algebra - it's a composition of binary relations.