On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 12:55 AM Steve Litt wrote:
> Rich, could you please elaborate on SQL queries being based on sets? I
> never thought of it that way, and would like to hear your related
> thoughts.
I'll take a crack at this. Going through the setup will require a
little patience, but I thi
On Wed, 15 Sep 2021, Steve Litt wrote:
Rich, could you please elaborate on SQL queries being based on sets? I
never thought of it that way, and would like to hear your related
thoughts.
SteveT,
In the 1980s, when there were computer magazines such as Byte and Database
Administrator (among man
>
> Rich, could you please elaborate on SQL queries being based on sets?
> I
> never thought of it that way, and would like to hear your related
> thoughts.
>
When Codd & Date elaborated the relational model, it was based on set
theory.
You have sets of data. Is there a relationship between the
tt
Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2021 16:54
To: pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: SQL queries as sets: was The tragedy of SQL
Rich Shepard said on Tue, 14 Sep 2021 05:49:07 -0700 (PDT)
>On Mon, 13 Sep 2021, Guyren Howe wrote:
>
>> They are making a decent decision. SQL is a
Oh, yeah, wow. Big topic.
My original post in the series is in significant part about how SQL hides this
sort of thing from you.
A table is a set: a set of true facts, all having the same structure, so you
can operate on all of them with any operation on the individual rows.
Multiple tables,
Rich Shepard said on Tue, 14 Sep 2021 05:49:07 -0700 (PDT)
>On Mon, 13 Sep 2021, Guyren Howe wrote:
>
>> They are making a decent decision. SQL is a *fucking terrible*
>> language, which I don’t blame them for not wanting to learn.
>
>>> SQL is not the problem. Problem are the devs. I love SQL.
