Results 1 to 14 of 14
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    3

    Objects AND Relations

    Hi everyone.

    I'm independent DBMS specialist from Russia. "Objects AND Relations" is my favorite theme for many years. If you google "impedance mismatch database" you'll possible find my paper 'Impedance mismatch is not "Objects vs. Relations" problem' on the first page. I have other papers in English and in Russian, and also a blog on the Russian analogue of this site.

    Unfortunately now everybody thinks that there is a fundamental contradiction between object-oriented and relation paradigms, so "VS." is usually used between these two definitions. There are a lot of historical and psychological reasons of such thought but generally it's a greatest mistake. To prove that this problem has very simple solution I've created DBMS prototype which fully unites core object-oriented and relational possibilities. I claim absolute novelty and fullness of this approach. This solution can be easy implemented in existing relational DBMS and after that they can be also deservedly named as object–oriented DBMS. It' doesn't require to change existing DB but makes possible to develop them in new direction. You can see its demonstration in video. Also I have a site dedicated to the problem and to the solution.

    I ask you to estimate the new possibilities. I would happy to hear any suggestions, advises, criticism, logical bug reports and plagiarism gravamen. Just be constructive, please

    I clear understand how you doubt about what I claim above. The main doubt is "everybody knows that it's impossible". But you can see de visu how simple it is.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    In front of the computer
    Posts
    15,579
    This thread generated far more attention and conflict than I believe that it was worth. I've peeled off the name calling, the unsubstantiated comments, etc.

    Grigoriev.E thinks that he's found something new and revolutionary. Those of us with a few years of experience are rather skeptical, having been burned with hundreds or thousands of similar claims that were unmitigated nonsense in the past and never having seen a working solution.

    Let's keep the conversation civil, and the observations technical. No name calling, no unsubstantiated claims (for or against the idea). Just because thousands of people have tried and failed doesn't mean that someone won't solve the problem partially or completely.

    There are many OOP wrappers that work well. They serve a tiny fraction of the market that desperately needs those tools and is willing to live with their associated cost. An efficient and generic solution would border on a miracle, but I've seen miracles in my lifetime so I don't discount the possibility that they might occur.

    -PatP
    In theory, theory and practice are identical. In practice, theory and practice are unrelated.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    12,592
    Generally, legitimate claims to "new" and "revolutionary" are bestowed by others, rather than being self-proclaimed.
    It appears to me that Mr. Grigoriev is exploiting our community in order to manufacture legitimacy for his company and his product, and that is stretching the boundaries of our rules.
    Maybe the thread should just be moved to the advertising subforum?
    If it's not practically useful, then it's practically useless.

    blindman
    www.chess.com: "sqlblindman"
    www.LobsterShot.blogspot.com

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    In front of the computer
    Posts
    15,579
    Quote Originally Posted by blindman View Post
    Generally, legitimate claims to "new" and "revolutionary" are bestowed by others, rather than being self-proclaimed.
    In the United States (and most of the western nations) that is true. In the former USSR, marketing, morals, and manners are quite different than they are in the United States. The ballyhoo that westerners associate with Vaudeville is quite alive in eastern Europe, and especially so in the former USSR.

    Quote Originally Posted by blindman View Post
    It appears to me that Mr. Grigoriev is exploiting our community in order to manufacture legitimacy for his company and his product, and that is stretching the boundaries of our rules.
    Maybe the thread should just be moved to the advertising subforum?
    I can understand why you would think that. I don't believe that there is a company formed yet, and until that is the case then there is nothing to market.

    By western standards, Mr Gregoriev does appear to be a charlatan hawking his wares. By eastern European standards, he could be easily judged as an academic trying to become an entrepreneur. The world is still quite a large place, and what works well in one culture may or may not work at all in another.

    As such, I'm inclined to give him some rope to see what he can do with it... But I'm not inclined to either help or hinder his cause... That he will have to do on his own.

    -PatP
    In theory, theory and practice are identical. In practice, theory and practice are unrelated.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    5,516
    Quote Originally Posted by Pat Phelan View Post
    In the former USSR, marketing, morals, and manners are quite different than they are in the United States. The ballyhoo that westerners associate with Vaudeville is quite alive in eastern Europe, and especially so in the former USSR.
    Frankly, I would consign this statement to the bin of unsubstantiated claims. Unless, Mr. Phelan, you would like to present some proof.
    ---
    "It does not work" is not a valid problem statement.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    76
    I see my comment was deleted as well. Perhaps deservedly so, since it seems bumping the thread contributed to it warming up. I hope to return to the topic without making more waves since I see some potential in it (and if I'm wrong, an opportunity to learn more).

    As far as I understand it, Mr. Grigoriev's project aims to provide an alternative to SQL, which includes 'classes'. I would've considered those fighting words if I heard that before I saw what he meant. Now I think his project offers useful ideas.

    If I understand it correctly, his classes are product types, and support nested relations, which we can compare to composite types and arrays in PostgreSQL. What's new here IMO is the ability to implement these elements as base tables or views. In PostgreSQL they're just value types to be used in other elements, meaning a composite value or array ends up stored wherever it's used. It seems here we can choose to have them normalized or stored in-place without affecting the way we access the data later.

    Composite type support and nested relations with access path independence seems like a pretty nice concept. There's more to it, of course, including 'methods' (stored procedures bound to a composite type) and a very compact querying syntax.

    Mr. Grigoriev, can it support recursive classes?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    In front of the computer
    Posts
    15,579
    Quote Originally Posted by n_i View Post
    Frankly, I would consign this statement to the bin of unsubstantiated claims. Unless, Mr. Phelan, you would like to present some proof.
    As all of my recent observations on this subject are directly tied to clients and business projects and I refuse to discuss client business publicly, I'll decline to prove the claim. Consider it to be my personal opinion based on my own (recent) observations.

    -PatP
    In theory, theory and practice are identical. In practice, theory and practice are unrelated.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    12,592
    Damn, Pat. MUST you be so diplomatic?
    Somewhere, overseas, there is a U.S. Embassy that is understaffed......
    If it's not practically useful, then it's practically useless.

    blindman
    www.chess.com: "sqlblindman"
    www.LobsterShot.blogspot.com

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    2,369
    "In the former USSR, marketing, morals, and manners are quite different than they are in the United States."

    n_i, you don't think some of it is true?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    5,516
    Quote Originally Posted by db2girl View Post

    n_i, you don't think some of it is true?
    I'd rather stick to technical discussions. We seem to have enough people to teach us morals and manners.
    ---
    "It does not work" is not a valid problem statement.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    12,592
    In Soviet Union, database normalize you! --Yakov Sqlnoff
    If it's not practically useful, then it's practically useless.

    blindman
    www.chess.com: "sqlblindman"
    www.LobsterShot.blogspot.com

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    3
    Hello everyone.

    I'm really shocked of current way of discussion. In deleted posts I personally was tried to be judged as ignorant, but I definitely showed that my judges had no notion about what they tried to judge. Ok. I only regret about technical details only given in that posts.

    But now you try to speak about differences of whole nations as argument of why I was or am not correct. One little detail: speaking about vaudeville in formed USSR you definitely forgot about street beers, vodka and balalaika. They could make the argument more convincing.

    Such conversations and comparisons are shortest way to a war. I don't think they are correct. Let's stop them. I will be happy if they are deleted as our previous posts. But don't delete technical details, clease.

    Also I've met a very strange phrase "By western standards, Mr Grigoriev does appear to be a charlatan hawking his wares". According to Oxford dictionary a charlatan is "a person falsely claiming to have a special knowledge or skill; a fraud". In my post I gave all materials (papers, video and site) which let you check if my claims are true or false. So, I don't understand ever where I _do appear to be a charlatan_. It's very serious incrimination for me. Try to prove it now if you can .

    >> Those of us with a few years of experience are rather skeptical.
    I'm absolutely agreed with this phrase (I'm not joking now). It's what I mean in my phrase " I clear understand how you doubt about what I claim above". I'm in the theme since 1998 and I know a lot enough about "hundreds or thousands of similar claims that were unmitigated nonsense" and many other more serious attempts. This knowledge let me claim again and again that my solution is novel. You can try to reject this claim but firstly you should be correct and objective.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    3
    2 reaand

    Thank you very much.

    >> Mr. Grigoriev, can it support recursive classes?
    Prototype demonstrated in video doesn't support recursion. But common idea (which is implemented on current variant of language) looks like the next

    SELECT … FROM ...
    THROUGH … (UP | DOWN) ….

    Here THROUGH contains path which defines recursion, (UP|DOWM ) defines points of the recursion start and its direction. Example

    CREATE CLASS EMPLOYEE
    {
    name...;
    }

    CREATE CLASS BOSS EXTENDS EMPLOYEE
    {
    employees SET OF EMPLOYEE…;
    }

    SELECT employees.name FROM BOSS ...
    THROUGH employees DOWN OF name="MainBoss"
    //"THROUGH" checks if some of "employees" are BOSSes
    // and executes SELECT again for found ones.
    // "DOWN" sets "starting point" in BOSS'es hierarchy.

    This query returns names of all employee under "MainBoss" in object hierarchy .

    Now a note on your post which is important for me
    >> … Mr. Grigoriev's project aims to provide an alternative to SQL …
    Not alternative. The offered commands are designed to extend SQL with classes which very similar to the ones existing in traditional OO languages. The same attempt was made by ORDBMS (Oracle since v8 and some others, standard SQL1999) but UDT and typed tables are not the same as classes; they are complex but not power. I use other principle of how OO can be combined with R. Prototype demonstrate only this principle. Traditional relational possibilities to work with tables and views have not been implemented in the prototype because it seems to me obvious.

    In other part you post is right. May be I would use some other terms sometimes, but the same things can be defined with different words. Thank you once again.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    In front of the computer
    Posts
    15,579
    Quote Originally Posted by Grigoriev.E View Post
    But now you try to speak about differences of whole nations as argument of why I was or am not correct. One little detail: speaking about vaudeville in formed USSR you definitely forgot about street beers, vodka and balalaika. They could make the argument more convincing.

    Such conversations and comparisons are shortest way to a war. I don't think they are correct. Let's stop them. I will be happy if they are deleted as our previous posts. But don't delete technical details, clease.

    Also I've met a very strange phrase "By western standards, Mr Grigoriev does appear to be a charlatan hawking his wares". According to Oxford dictionary a charlatan is "a person falsely claiming to have a special knowledge or skill; a fraud". In my post I gave all materials (papers, video and site) which let you check if my claims are true or false. So, I don't understand ever where I _do appear to be a charlatan_. It's very serious incrimination for me. Try to prove it now if you can .
    I'm assuming that these comments apply to me, so I'll address them as if they were meant for me.

    I'm entirely for giving you a fair chance, and actually intervened in order to prevent you from being banned from DBForums and your discussion from being deleted entirely. I actively WANT you to have a chance to prove your points.

    Cultural differences are one of the hardest things to perceive and deal with on the internet. If you consider the controlled chaos that is the Akihabara, the warrens of Fleet Street, the Eletrolar in Sao Paulo, and Comdex they all have a central theme but the presentations that are "normal" in any one of them might get you arrested in another! Unless you "grok" the venue and its culture, you have no choice but to interpret it in the context of your own culture so you will most most of the value of what is there. This is the problem that I see both you and your detractors to be suffering from, and a large part of what is keeping you from being able to communicate with each other... I think that this cultural gap is a much larger problem than the language difference.

    While you can easily look up the definition of words in a dictionary, that definition only gives you the denotation and completely ignores the connotation. This is why diplomatic corps spend so much time and effort on teaching culture instead of simply teaching language to their diplomatic staff... Knowing the language is critical to communication, knowing the culture is critical to understanding what has been communicated!

    I understand that you could have something worthwhile to present. The way that you've chosen to present it makes it hard for a western trained academic or business person to accept, due to the cultural differences I discussed earlier.

    At least for the moment you are welcome to present here at DBForums. I'll make every reasonable effort to give you your say, and you can use that opportunity as you see fit. Please make the most of that opportunity!

    -PatP
    In theory, theory and practice are identical. In practice, theory and practice are unrelated.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •