🚀 go-pugleaf

> In article <564@whuts.UUCP> 6243tes@whuts.UUCP (STERKEL) writes:
> >[For those who graduate from relational to "real databases", ...
> 
> Please explain what you mean by this, before I light my flametorch.
> -- 
> UUCP:    {gatech,harvard,ihnp4,pyramid,seismo}!ut-sally!ark
actually the answer is quite simple:
in my occasional delving into the application of 
data base managers to real world problems, I find
approximately 70% of the problems to be not "list"
or "flat-file" oriented. These applications are
in reality the need to intelligently and efficiently
map "one-to-many", "many-to-one", and "many-to-many"
situations, and linkages.  I am then faced with the
prospect of using a very powerful embedded language
within a better relational dbms (K-Man 1.07/2 is the
best example) to do *alot* of custom programming
to force the linkages within the relational context
or move up-scale to a "brute" "networking" dbms such
as MDBS III.  

To provide one example,  networking dbms's such as
MDBS III will readily provide for the realities of
genealogical research such as sibling relationships,
marriage, multiple/serial marriages, polygamy, etc.
without custom programing to sift through the data
to "find" and "catagorize" same.  (Incidentally,
geneologies rarely match the ideal of the "family
tree" forms sold by stationary stores.  Thus, Heir-
archal dbms's are rarely useful.)

I am ill equiped to discuss the theoretical bases of
data bases.  Please get to a good technical (not computer
hacker) library for a better explanation than I have
provided.