× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.



Hello,

I really do not think that the S/36, S/34 and their predecessors qualify
as relational database machines simply because they supported a chain by a
key instead of just RRN in RPG.

I'd say the S/34, S/36 databases do not qualify as "relational" because they do not have columns. (Or, perhaps I should say, the columns are not known to the DBMS.)

A key aspect of a relational database is that a particular column (the "key") can be used to define a relationship between data from different tables. You can't have that if you don't have columns in your database.

But, I'd say that RLA logic on an externally-defined file does qualify as a relational database. An unconventional one, to be sure, but it does qualify. You can define columns, and use them to join data sets together (whether via RPG's CHAIN, or by a DDS join-logical, or by SQL) and use the data in a relational manner.

But, this whole topic is largely a matter of interpretation and opinion. I don't think there's an authoritative answer.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.