×
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.
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.
midrange.com
