Download Structured Query Language (SQL)

Structured Query Language (SQL)
Structured query language (SQL) was designed to implement both data definition and
data manipulation facilities such as storing, processing, retrieval and management of data
items in the underlying data repository (Database) on which it is running. The foregoing is
substantiated by (Coronel et al., 2013) that, SQL makes it all possible, as a database linguistic
that permits you to construct database and table organizations, implement elementary data
management routines such as addition, deletion, and modification of data items, and execute
composite enquiries intended to transmute the underdone data into advantageous information
resources. SQL abstract details of how the procedure should be carried out and rather dictates
or declares what should be done concerning the structure, definition and manipulation of the
database, thus leaving the implementation details to the relational database management
system (RDBMS). It can be thought of an infrastructure whose intent is to provide a familiar
and friendly interface between the physical database and the developer as well as the users
alike giving them the possession of powerful set of skills to harness huge data resources with
little investment of time and effort consequently. SQL was define as forms of data access and
retrieval mechanism as established by the E.F. Codd’s twelve rules proposition for the
relational data model (RDM) which bear genuine eloquence of homogeneity expected across
diverse implementations by vendors. Consequentially, (Coronel et al., 2013) averred in the
affirmative that, SQL as a database linguistic has essential ability to accomplish the
rudimentary tasks with least user energy, and its command arrangement and grammar are
stress-free to acquire, it can be transferrable; such that, it adapts to various simple standard
that requires that an individual does not have to relearn the essentials when moving from one
RDBMS to another.
The evidence of interoperability among various implementations of SQL have been
enunciated by the foregoing which states unequivocally that it must exhibit characteristic
portability as a fundamental expectation of its implementation, therefore it suffice as matter
of grave concern to discover that vendors are enhancing or extending the laid down
implementation standard specified for the same reasons highlighted earlier. In my humble
opinion it is should not be encouraged. I observed majorly that the motivation that, a vendor
want to outdo other vendors in the RDBMS competition for substantial market share of
client’s patronage of it product it the potential reason for these activities, however, any other
reason(s) are mere secondary issues which should take back sit in the interest of promoting
interests which are beneficial to the majorities.
(Burns et al., 1996) averred vehemently that, “while the SQL standard (SQL92)
provides a starting point for a multilevel SQL, each of the MLS DBMS vendors has
implemented different multilevel extensions. The result is an assortment of concepts and
mechanisms that designers of multilevel database applications must understand and apply
differently for each different DBMS.” Therefore suffice from the foregoing is the fact that
interoperability and portability which are the threshold on which the standard was founded
had been defeated inadvertently. The implications portend grave consequences for the
developers and users alike if they operate in a heterogeneous environment hosting varieties of
RDBMS. (Perkovic, 1991) advanced similarly that, ANSI/ISO SQL 89 standard promoted
language objectives such as client-server model, session management, data types, dynamic
SQL, error handling, information schema and transaction handling to ensuring portability
among different implementations to alleviate unintended difficulties or damage it portends to
user’s data and developer’s development time and effort. The table exemplified the
comparisons of where some of the key implementation items mentioned earlier was
implemented by various vendors’ DBMS:
(Burns et al., 1996)
Another contextual issue rose by (Hossain et al., 2012) suggest that, “Database
synchronization is a complex process in heterogeneous database environment. Maintaining
the uniformity of data and its structure is a fundamental problem of data synchronization.”
This is susceptible to inviting some errors which possibly will materialize in target database
for data type incompatibility or SQL query function discrepancy or unreachability. Except for
the reason mentioned earlier, vendor’s extendibility of the SQL are incomparable and not
interoperable with other vendors alike and on this basis serve no significant advantage(s) for
either the developers or the users community in my opinion and I advised that such practice
should be discouraged with serious resistance. If possible with legislation.
SQL is a declarative programming language as compared with Java programming
language which is object oriented. In Java you need to rap data and functions that operate on
them together as object. Object communicate with other object through an interface define by
the object’s function responsible for the action intended by the calling object. Objects are
instantiated member of a class which is a template that specifies or define the detail of object
instantiation. Every class emanates from the root class and classes are arranged as hierarchies
with each class in the lower hierarchy extending the characteristics and behaviors of it
superclass in the hierarchy. While Java is manipulates and manage objects and their
relationships with other objects, SQL is manipulates table or relations, tuples or rows and
columns or attributes through the basic relational constructs such as SELECT, PROJECT,
UNION, INTERSECTION, DIFFERENCE, PRODUCT, JOIN and DIVIDE.
In my opinion SQL had been a very good initiative placing in our hands a powerful
ability to manipulate and implement certain integrity constraints to maintain autonomous data
structure across the physical data storage infrastructure.
References:
Coronel, C., Morris, S., Rob, P. (2013) Database Systems: Design, Implementation, and
Management, 10th Edition. Cengage Learning, 01/2012.
Burns, R.K.; Koh, Y., "A comparison of multilevel structured query language (SQL)
implementations," Computer Security Applications Conference, 1996., 12th Annual ,
vol., no., pp.192,202, 9-13 Dec 1996
Perkovic, P., "SQL access and ANSI/ISO SQL and X/Open," Compcon Spring '91. Digest of
Papers , vol., no., pp.120,122, Feb. 25 1991-March 1 1991
Hossain, M.I.; Ali, M.M., "SQL query based data synchronization in heterogeneous database
environment," Computer Communication and Informatics (ICCCI), 2012 International
Conference on , vol., no., pp.1,5, 10-12 Jan. 2012
Bibliographies:
Reinwald, B.; Pirahesh, H.; Krishnamoorthy, G.; Lapis, G.; Tran, B.; Vora, S.,
"Heterogeneous query processing through SQL table functions," Data Engineering,
1999. Proceedings., 15th International Conference on , vol., no., pp.366,373, 23-26 Mar
1999
Ju Fan; Guoliang Li; Lizhu Zhou, "Interactive SQL query suggestion: Making databases userfriendly," Data Engineering (ICDE), 2011 IEEE 27th International Conference on , vol.,
no., pp.351,362, 11-16 April 2011