T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
1165.1 | Join of how many tables? | TRCOA::MCMULLEN | Ken McMullen | Thu Jun 18 1992 16:16 | 8 |
| 1,000,000 million rows per table - NO PROBLEM the real limitation for
table cardinality is disk space.
32 K tables in a join - who could construct/envision such a thing! The
government must be smoking and not destroying the drugs they
confiscate.
|
1165.2 | RE: FIPS | NOVA::FEENAN | Jay Feenan Rdb/xxx Engineering | Thu Jun 18 1992 23:18 | 5 |
| please read note 933 and its replies.
cheers,
jay
|
1165.3 | Clarification? | BROKE::HIGGS | SQL is a camel in disguise | Fri Jun 19 1992 17:18 | 41 |
| <<< Note 1165.0 by SCAACT::ADISESHAN >>>
I think you need to go back and clarify what is meant by some of
these terms:
Req'd
for
Rdb Oracle AS/400 FIPS 127-1?
--- ------ ------ -----------
Data-types:
Character yes ___ ___ ___
Decimal no_ ___ ___ ___
Packed decimal no_ ___ ___ ___
Floating point yes ___ ___ ___
Null Value yes ___ ___ ___
Logical Data no_ ___ ___ ___
1) Please have them define what is meant by 'data-types'.
For example, Rdb can define columns within a table as
being of type DECIMAL or NUMERIC (along with other types).
And the host variable types that correspond to these types
are also supported (in those languages that support them)
But the physical representation on disk is not in DECIMAL
or NUMERIC form. So we could say that Rdb supports
Decimal/Packed decimal, or not, depending on the customer's
definition.
2) What is meant by Decimal, as opposed to Packed decimal?
It could be that they mean NUMERIC when they use the term
Decimal, and DECIMAL when they use the term Packed decimal,
but I don't know.
3) What do they mean by logical data? Boolean? Enumerations?
Something else?
Bryan
|
1165.4 | Comments...no direct answers | COOKIE::MELTON | The zen of character sets | Sat Jun 20 1992 01:38 | 15 |
| I'd like to echo Bryan's comments in .3; the table that you supplied in .0
is a bit ambiguous, so it's hard to know what they really want.
Also, the last 2 lines of the "Database-limits" section are absurd.
Nobody (and I mean "nobody"!) would really want 32,768 tables in a view or
in a join. Perhaps this was a simple typographical error and "32" was
intended instead of "32K"? The other values are reasonable.
As far as FIPS 127-1 goes, I no longer know where my copy is, but I'm
quite sure that Steve Horn must have a copy (or know where to access one).
After all, Rdb/VMS must have had one to ensure that their limits covered
those required by the FIPS.
Good luck,
Jim
|