On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 1:27 PM, Puneet Kishor <punk.k...@gmail.com> wrote: > Wols Lists wrote: >> On 13/12/10 01:38, Darren Duncan wrote: >>> Darren Duncan wrote: >>>> Wols Lists wrote: >>>>> Dunno how well that approach translates into a relational engine, >>>>> because Pick has several very non-relational quirks (every "row" MUST >>>>> have a primary key, the dictionary DEscribes, not PREscribes the FILE, >>>>> etc etc). >>>> Can you say more about this last paragraph. These last couple items don't >>>> necessarily mean that Pick is non-relational given how they can be >>>> interpreted. >>>> (I don't know anything about Pick.) >>> Actually, nevermind. Google is your friend. -- Darren Duncan >> >> Pick is a jack-of-all-trades database - I describe it as being a bit >> like C - it gives you all the rope you need to shoot yourself in the >> foot :-) But it's best if used as an object-relational database. Pick >> has FILEs and RECORDs instead of TABLEs and ROWs, and you can store >> lists in a cell :-) >> >> Personally, I believe relational *technology* is fatally flawed by >> design - there's nothing wrong with the maths, but you can't do >> astronomy with classical physics and you can't do large information >> stores with set theory :-) >> >> I know that's flame-bait, but let's quickly explain ... >> >> I would say that a well designed Pick database uses the >> object-relational paradigm. Each file is a class, each record is an >> instance, and each record is a FULLY NORMALISED N-DIMENSIONAL ARRAY. >> (Just not first normal form.) >> >> So my datastore is heavily influenced by the real world. And I can >> reason about real world performance. All stuff that's forbidden in a >> "real" relational database. And actually, I can prove that my default >> performance is pretty close to a real relational database's theoretical >> best. >> >> But all of that depends on a close tying between the logical structure, >> the physical structure, and the real world. And all of that is totally >> antithetical to the basis behind relational database theory. >> >> And building on that, I would actually conclude that, just as in the >> real world parallel lines DO meet (Euclid's statement to the contrary >> notwithstanding), I would also conclude that in the real world data does >> NOT come just as rows and columns in sets (C&D's statement to the >> contrary notwithstanding), but it also comes in lists, bags, and jumbles. >> >> I'm quite happy to carry on discussing this, either privately or on the >> list, but there's a very good chance the list wouldn't welcome it ... >> > > > I am interested in reading more about this. Why don't you write up a > blog post or an article, put it on your web site. You do have a web > site, no? Hopefully, powered by an object-relational, non-Euclidean, > file-and-record database, the pick of the litter ;-) > > Seriously, I would love to read more about this as I am interested in > storage technologies for gridded data (think cells in a remote sensing > image). For now, all I have is the image of Dick Pick hanging upside > down in his anti-gravity shoes burned in my brain.
Pick has been around for a very long time, use those interwebs: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pick_operating_system -scott _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
