[REBOL] Re: Relational Database
From: agem::crosswinds::net at: 8-Jul-2001 1:09
RE: [REBOL] Relational Database
> Hi Scott,
> At 08:45 AM 6/27/2001 -0500, you wrote:
> >I remain a bit puzzled about number 2, and maybe it is only do to
> >mis-communication. The beauty of the system that Carl S. prototyped for
> >you is
> >that the data object is nearly infinitely expandable to encompass any
> >combination of data fields that you might conceive of. Only one data
> >"table" is
> >needed. The relationship is inherent in the object concept. While it is
> >certainly "do-able" to create a separate table that shares the key with the
> >initial table, I am unclear whether there would be any advantage to this
> >approach, especially for the small scale database that you have
> >envisioned. Can
> >you give a hypothetical example of the kind of additional data that you might
> >wish to store? Maybe with a concrete example, I could at least prototype a
> >method to demonstrate the idea.
> >--Scott Jones
> An example: If one were to deal with certain organizations and their
> CEO's. The CEO's often change in some businesses, but you remain friends
> with (and in contact with) both the CEO and the organization. In such
> cases it is best to have the organizations in one database, and the CEO's
> in a different database. The two databases can be joined together by
> having the CEO's phone number in both databases; all other information
> would be different. This would enable you to draw information from both
> databases as if they were one. If a CEO moves to a different organization,
> only phone numbers have to be changed---all other information remains valid
> as is.
have a look at codeconscious (Brett),
Because I've had too many years of SQL buzzing around my head I thought I would
create a few cute functions like array-project, array-select and array-join. The
functions work on data that is assumed to have the structure returned by the array
function of Rebol.
seems to be a bit of sql with rebol-blocks as tables.
other approach, but one could write block-to-objects and vice versa?
if you think its worth something we could help?