27 of 27 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Mathematics and Database Design, March 21, 2009
This review is from: SQL and Relational Theory: How to Write Accurate SQL Code (Paperback)
In this book the author argues that the only database model that will endure is the relational model, because it is "rock solid" and "right." Other models such as the "hierarchic model" or the "object oriented model" or the "semistructured model" are doomed to fail because there is no consensus on what they actually represent.
The relational model of databases is based on the pioneering work of E.F. Codd, a mathematician working for IBM who published his initial seminal paper in 1969. A language to support queries in relational databases was subsequently developed, which was ultimately named SQL, and variants of that language are used to extract data from relational databases.
This book gives an excellent review of SQL; it includes many examples of SQL code. The book is written as a technical treatise and would not be an easy read for someone who isn't familiar with the use of SQL. The original description of relational databases was mathematical in nature, and this book follows in that vein, using mathematical "proofs" to illustrate the best approach to the use of SQL in relational databases. There are many exercises given at the end of each chapter, and the answers to the exercises are given at the end of the book. There is a seven page index. Appendices A & B provide a somewhat simplified, easier to read discussion of the primary goals of the book than the book chapters do, for those wishing a simplified synopsis of the main points, I'd suggest reading those appendices first.
For those who would appreciate a theoretical discussion of database design and SQL development that will "bullet proof" their code, this is an excellent book. For those who'd like a more nuanced discussion of why there should only be one instance of any data set in their tables, this book provides the answers. But for the mathematically challenged, it may be tough going.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
16 of 16 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
My mind was blown, my head has grown, my SQL has entered the zone, June 23, 2009
This review is from: SQL and Relational Theory: How to Write Accurate SQL Code (Paperback)
I have spent the last three or four weeks struggling through this book. Never content to know only the "how" of something, I wanted to learn some of the "why" behind SQL databases. This book covers that in depth, with a steep learning curve for someone like me who has a bit of experience using SQL in various applications, but who has never formally studied it. That is not a bad thing.
First, a bit of background. The author, C. J. Date, is well known in the field for his classic textbook An Introduction to Database Systems, which has gone through at least eight editions. He began working on databases in 1970 at IBM and worked with the inventor of the relational theory of database design, E. F. Codd. There is no doubt that this is a man who knows what he is talking about.
What this book sets out to do, in about 400 pages, is describe and define the relational model in greater depth and compare how SQL is currently used in many database applications like Oracle and MySQL to the theoretical ideal. As he does this, Date points out several inconsistencies with the SQL adaptation of the relational model and makes suggestions for how to adjust common usage to more closely conform to the ideal while acknowledging that at times perfect syncronization will be impossible using SQL. He also gives numerous examples of how it could be done in Tutorial D, which is an interesting study in itself.
I submit that this book is ideal for theorists, for highly qualified and experienced database administrators who want to learn at the feet of a sometimes emphatic and slightly dogmatic master who has been instrumental in the creation and spread of the relational database idea, but whose theory has not been perfectly implemented. If you merely want to know how to work within current implementation constraints without the larger picture, skip this book. If you want some fascinating, and sometimes difficult to grasp background and theory that will likely make you a better database wizard, this book is likely to help you get there.
Here are some highlights, sample questions and topics discussed in the book:
* What are the differences between the relational model and the various product implementations available today and in the past?
* Should a relational database allow duplicate entries?
* Why are null values a bad idea?
* What do relational expressions mean?
* Why must database constraint checking be immediate, at least in theory, and why is it often deferred in practice?
Seriously, that is just the beginning. There are excellent examples of SQL code throughout the book, great discussions of the mathematics behind the genesis of relational theory, and more. Beware, though, you may have to work to understand it, but it will be worthwhile for those who do.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
16 of 17 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
The "Code Complete" of SQL Books, March 16, 2009
This review is from: SQL and Relational Theory: How to Write Accurate SQL Code (Paperback)
C. J. Date has just released what I would say is the "Code Complete" manual for SQL. Not for the layman, this work explains [in intricate detail] the whys and wherefores of SQL, and how to over its many idiosyncrasies. From Keys and Constraints, to using joins, to all the types of normalization, this is a great reference for everyone.
If you read this book, please follow the author's instructions and don't skip over sections because of some familiarity. The detail in which he delves into even "simple" functionality in SQL are useful to see the big picture.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
