On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 02:31:20AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Date and Pascal hate nulls. One even goes so far as to say that if > you permit NULLs in a database, then the results from *every* query > is suspect. So they turn perform backflips suggesting ways to avoid > nulls. None, so far, seem appealing.
That is part of the story. Interestingly to me is that the more stridently they've rejected NULLs, the fuzzier their suggestions have been about what to do in cases of missing information. [snip] > What precisely has Date and Pascal's knickers in such a twist? The > fact that ad hoc queries from random, unintelligent users could give > strange results? What has their knickers in a twist is what twists the knickers of every other doctrinaire ideologue: that everybody doesn't "just get" why their way is far superior, drop everything they're doing, and change over to the True Wayâ¢. Their "Eat Grapefruit, You Morons" <http://www.angryflower.com/getthe.gif> tactics don't do anything to endear them either. It's good to read what Date, Darwen & Pascal have to say, but only once so you can recognize the flavor of bamboozlement when some impressionable youth (of whatever age) has a "revelation" about How Databases Should Be®. This way, you can help explain gently that their "new insight" is neither new nor insightful, and that there are some good papers <http://www.cs.toronto.edu/~libkin/publ.html> to read. Cheers, D -- David Fetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://fetter.org/ phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Skype: davidfetter Remember to vote! ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
