Note: "Setting Matters Straight" is a new format: I post on LinkedIn an online Q&A involving data fundamentals that I subsequently debunk in a post here. This is to encourage readers to test their foundation knowledge against our debunking here, where we confirm what is correct and correct what is fallacious. For in-depth treatments check out the POSTS and our PAPERS, LINKS and BOOKS (or organize one of our on-site/online SEMINARS, which can be customized to specific needs). Questions and comments are welcome here and on LinkedIn.
Q: “To what extent is relational database theory related to set theory?”
A: “Relational database theory is indeed closely derived from set theory. Many operations in relational data are directly related to common operations one does with sets. In fact, SQL has keywords for them that should sound familiar to someone who has just taken a class in Discrete Mathematics:Even the structure of a table is set-oriented. A table is a set of rows, and a row is a set of columns, and those columns must match the set of columns defined in the table's header.”
- UNION
- INTERSECT
- DIFFERENCE (called MINUS in Oracle)
--Quora.com