DCorbit@connx.com ("Dann Corbit") wrote in message
news:<D90A5A6C612A39408103E6ECDD77B829408BE9@voyager.corporate.connx.com>...
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Seun Osewa [mailto:seunosewa@inaira.com]
> > Sent: Friday, October 03, 2003 11:52 AM
> > To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
> > Subject: [HACKERS] Dreaming About Redesigning SQL
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > This is for relational database theory experts on one hand
> > and imlementers of real-world alications on the other hand.
> > If there was a chance to start again and design SQL afresh,
> > for best cleaness/power/performance what changes would you
> > make? What would your query language (and the underlying
> > database concept) look like?
> >
> > Seun Osewa
> > PS: I should want to post my ideas too for review but more
> > experienced/qualified people should come first
>
> I imagine you have read the 3rd database manifesto by Codd. I think
> he's gone off the deep end a bit.
Dann, you are showing your ignorance. While Dr. Codd recently died, if
you think he wrote a third database manifesto, you have definitely
gone off the deep end yourself.
> You don't just throw away a trillion
> dollars worth of effort and tools to make things mathematically
> orthogonal.
Again, you are showing your ignorance. Nobody has ever suggested
anything even remotely resembling the above.
> However, on some things he is clearly right. For instance, null values
> are evil.
Dr. Codd believed we need two NULLs. You ascribe correctness to the
one thing I think he clearly got wrong.
> Programmers understand it
That's an absurd assertion.
> Therefore, his idea of using default values instead and never using null
> is a good one.
That is not his idea.
> If SQL vendors would follow the ANSI/ISO standard to the letter, and
> implement the latest iteration, that would solve all of the problems
> that SQL tool users have to face.
Upon what do you base this ridiculous opinion?