In message <pf4o0q$o80$1@news.albasani.net>, Ken Springer ><wordworks@greeleynet.com> writes:
[]
I'm no database expert either, but I do know not every database need >>requires Access or other relational databases.[]
And finding info about non relational databases seems to be like
searching for hen's teeth.
I'm trying to understand what "relational" actually _means_ here. Rather
than just asking, I did try to look at the wikipedia entry, but it made
my brain hurt ...
I _think_ it means data that's crosslinked in various ways. (I do
genealogy, and I think the software I use is a relational database.) But
this makes me wonder what a _non_-relational database would _be_, other
than some sort of list or table.
A relational database is one that links several tables so that you can
save space for repeating data.
still more flexible than a relational database. I've used it, for[]
example, to index family letters, typing in extracts or summaries of >intormation from hard-copy letters people sent me. These often refer
to several people, and if you saved them in a relational genealogy
prtogram you'd actually end up with more duplication than you would in
a "flat-file" database.
In message <cejehdts0kd68rco1683ekhia0cotdrv93@4ax.com>, Steve Hayes ><hayesstw@telkomsa.net> writes:
[]
A relational database is one that links several tables so that you can
save space for repeating data.
I'm sure that there is more to the linking than just the saving of
space. (Especially nowadays, when wasting space seems almost
obligatory.)
still more flexible than a relational database. I've used it, for[]
example, to index family letters, typing in extracts or summaries of >>intormation from hard-copy letters people sent me. These often refer
to several people, and if you saved them in a relational genealogy
prtogram you'd actually end up with more duplication than you would in
a "flat-file" database.
The one I use (Brother's Keeper) lets me link to files; in the case of a >letter like the one you quoted, until I'd parsed all the individual
facts in it, I'd just put the letter in a file, and link all the people
it refers to to that one file. When I had time, I'd extract facts from
it and file them under the affected persons, with the source credited -
I can link a single "source" to lots of facts. (I would also remove the
facts from the original as I went, until I'd eventually got it down to >nothing, then delete it, with the individual facts - with extracts if >necessary - filed under the people they refer to, and citing it from the
list of sources [which are a flat file]; that's just me, and I know some >people would keep the full original text file even once they'd copied
the facts it contained to more appropriate places.)
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 286 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 89:49:27 |
Calls: | 6,496 |
Calls today: | 7 |
Files: | 12,100 |
Messages: | 5,277,556 |