Table Weenie

DeleteMe: FlameBait, no usable content [PLEASE HOLD it for now.]

No, there are differences between a relational weenie and a table weenie.. don't delete.

RelationalWeenie identifies strongly with the relational model (lives in it), while a TableWeenie is more interested in tables, cells, rows, etc.

A relational weenie overlaps with a table weenie, but the relational weenie is more mathematical, more pure, more academic, more interested in relvars than a table weenie is interested in tables.

This page is intended to be a partial FlameBait, as all CategoryWeenie pages are. So, noting that, don't flame.. because you know this page is just here to categorize a particular thought style and is not intended to insult.

Yes, it *is* flamebait. Its a false category to label someone "non-academic" when you disagree with their particular approach to relational.

Incorrect. No one said non-academic anywhere. More or less, was the claim. And what part of don't flame do you not understand?

{The topic name doesn't bother me ("weenie" is tradition here), but "more academic" does. Economics is not any less "academic" than math. Although one could argue that one is a "hard" topic and the other "soft" in that it approaches having TooManyVariablesForScience. But being a "soft" science/subject does not necessarily make it any less valid. It's a case SovietShoeFactoryPrinciple at play. Related DisciplineEnvy. --top}

Some people claim to be a RelationalWeenie, but they are actually a TableWeenie.

A table wheenie doesn't care about relational purity or tuple purity, he cares more about a table oriented product that just works whether pure or not. A table wheenie can be satisfied with bags or tuples, or both, and can be satisfied with rows and tables rather than more pure relvars and tuples.

"Doesn't care" may be an excessive characterization. "Allow but discourage" would be my point of view. Tools should allow bags, but gently discourage them, for example (SQL doesn't currently qualify, BTW). And relational with bags is not different enough from relational without bags to make an entire distinction. I consider them different sects of relational rather than a different religion. The operations, concepts, and idioms are very similar under each. -t

See also: TableOrientedProgramming, TopMind

EditText of this page (last edited March 12, 2012) or FindPage with title or text search