o ents on t e
ir - eneration ata ase ste anifesto"
Oregon raduate Institute
pril 23, 1991
hese notes are re ections on the hir - eneration ata ase
S ste anifesto" the o ittee for vance S unction, the version of 22 ri 1 , hereafter ca e ". hi e this is a ersona vie , ene tte fro a iscussion of the ith a co t inson, rancois anci hon, ave e itt an aus ittrich. reco en that one rea the efore rea in this ocu ent, as assu e fa i iar it ith its contents. [ t has een rinte in S ecor 1 : , Se te - er 1 .] hese notes a e free co ie for ersona use as on as the are u icate in their entiret .
ntrod ction and rgani ation
It is unclear whether the 3GM is intended as a definition of a new class of DBMSs, as a prognostication, as a research and development agenda or as a marketing piece. It may be something of each, judging from the arguments in it. Some are on semantic and engineering grounds, but other are based on perceived customer demands or market forces. Most disturbing is an undercurrent of implication that requirements for next generation database systems should be tempered by what are compatible extensions to current relational models and technology. The message I read is that relational systems, or their slight extensions, are the end of history" as far as database systems go. The bottom line is that there should be one flavor of next generation database system and that flavor should be extended relational.
There is a tone in the 3GM of if it can't be added easily to current relational systems, it must be wrong" and that data models should only evolve if the current implementations can evolve along with them. We shouldn't abandon the successes of the relational model lightly, but they shouldn't bind us from exploring new territory. Columbus had to sail out of sight of land to find the New World. Even if third-generation systems end up looking a lot like their