The relational model for database management
了解 E. F. Codd 的《The relational model for database management》（The relational model for database management）：2007-02-22–2026-11-01 的 Hacker News 数据中有 7 次提及、7 位讨论者。阅读原文摘录、比较不同观点，将它加入你的书单。
分享到 X社区里的声音
最近 7 条来源记录提及不等于推荐。标签来自源数据的自动分类；请打开原始讨论核对上下文。
此记录保留了作者、时间和来源链接，请打开 HN 阅读完整上下文。
在 Hacker News 阅读原文此记录保留了作者、时间和来源链接，请打开 HN 阅读完整上下文。
在 Hacker News 阅读原文此记录保留了作者、时间和来源链接，请打开 HN 阅读完整上下文。
在 Hacker News 阅读原文此记录保留了作者、时间和来源链接，请打开 HN 阅读完整上下文。
在 Hacker News 阅读原文此记录保留了作者、时间和来源链接，请打开 HN 阅读完整上下文。
在 Hacker News 阅读原文此记录保留了作者、时间和来源链接，请打开 HN 阅读完整上下文。
在 Hacker News 阅读原文I don't use databases myself, but the discussions over the last few weeks about "no-SQL" have gotten me curious and I have been nibbling at Codd's "The Relational Model for Database Management" since I had it laying around, and it is mostly theory I am interested in right now. He spent a great deal of time complaining that no vendor actually produced a database that was at all close to the relational model. My question is whether any DB products, especially any free software, matches the relational model any better than the ones Codd was complaining about nearly two decades ago? Which databases, if any, are the closest to being really relational, not just sort of?
在 Hacker News 阅读原文