Re: Relational data model dead?

Tom Lane wrote:
> Martin Marques <martin(at)bugs(dot)unl(dot)edu(dot)ar> writes:
> > Has someone read this: http://www.wiscorp.com/sql/Sql99_p2.zip
>
> I get a "not found"...
>
> > Are this guys at Whitemarsh Information Systems Corporation important in the
> > SQL99 writing?
>
> Unlikely; if they are of the persuasion that relational DBs are
> uninteresting, they'd hardly be spending time working on bigger and
> better(?) standards for relational DBs.
>
> "Relational databases are dead" has been a standard academic litany for
> years now, but it has nothing to do with the real world AFAICS.

Maybe it means there isn't anything interesting to study about
relational databases. From an academic perspective, the fact it meets
people's needs is beyond the point. :-)

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073