Suppose I've got a part of schedule as:
...
T1 : Read(X)
T2 : Write(X)

Let's say I have two relvars like:
RELVAR R { A INTEGER, B INTEGER } KEY { A }
RELVAR S { A INTEGER, C INTEGER } KEY { A }
CONSTRAINT ( JOIN { R, S } { A } = S { A } )

What do you believe is the best naming convention for tables, columns,
schemas and why?

Let's say I have two relvars like:
RELVAR R { A INTEGER, B INTEGER } KEY { A }
RELVAR S { A INTEGER, C INTEGER } KEY { A }
CONSTRAINT ( JOIN { R, S } { A } = S { A } )

I sometimes wonder why the above noun used in place of an adjective is
needed.    When the table/relation definition of a line item references
an invoice number can it mean anything other than that the line item
doesn't exist unless the invoice exists?  Ie., why shouldn't delete

I've been reading a lot of CJ Date's work, and I have some fairly
general (but fundamental) questions.
Does a predicate apply to a relvar or a relation? It makes sense to me
that you could have one relation that exists in two separate variables

---------------
Glossary 0.1.1:                 "You keep using that word.
                                I do not think it means what
February   2006                 you think it means"

On the past two monthes, I have witnessed some shy but interesting
attempts by Marshall and JOG at bringing some interesting subjects.  I
find some of these subjects useful for characterizing better  or
exploring unclear areas of database RM.  Even though, I was very busy

does any of you know about a signing algorithm (as in digital signature) for
relational databases. I guess there are some academic papers on this topic
but can't find them using Google.
Julien

I am designing a database to hold stock prices for about 200 stock
symbols. I had some ideas but am not sure since this is my first major
database design. Could anyone please point me to some papers/books/
websites or give me some ideas to start?

Firstly this is theoretical situation where I have no DDL to show you,
I'm trying to get my head around how it works.
I have a situation where I have a many-to-many relationship between
ITEMS and CATEGORIES, with a simple table in between holding ItemID

INSERT is the imperative form UNION. There are some
restrictions, because imperative statements must operate
on variables, and so are restricted in what they can
do about types.

Currently we have a subscription service website which manages time
and attendance for companies using a MySQL database. Currently all
companies and users are in the same database. Every company has a
companyid and every user has a userid and is joined to a company by

Hey, where is everybody? Nobody's posting. What's up with that?
Marshall

I found one of the most interesting parts in a gargantuan recent
thread was the listing of priorities for reaching a certain audience
and determining what one wants to get across (Thanks to bob for that.
You may object to his style but I've found there can be lot of value