Talk:Hierarchical database model

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Databases / Computer science  (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Databases, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of database related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Computer science (marked as High-importance).
 

Can anyone tell me what the 'restrictions' actually are?

Reason for {{Cleanup}}[edit]

The text doesn't reflect the lemma: Hierarchical model should describe the logical elements only, but the introduction for example talks about database management systems. --S.K. 17:39, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Agreed - for definite the current 'definition' includes elements that are clearly descriptions of relational database models, rather than hierarchical models, and are therefore inaccurate/incorrect. Unfortunately I don't have a complete and reliable alternative definition for you.

Also - Isn't Adabas a relational database?

G.R.P, Wilts, 2nd May 06

According to Software AG's Adabase site Adabase D is 'a database system that fully implements the relational model'. Apparently not all versions of Adabase are relational.

K.K.S. July 17, 2006

LDAP[edit]

Is LDAP considered to follow the hierarchical model?

From the LDAP article:

LDAP directory entries feature a hierarchical structure that reflects political, geographic, and/or organizational boundaries. In the original X.500 model, entries representing countries appear at the top of the tree; below them come entries representing states or national organizations. Typical LDAP deployments use DNS names for structuring the top levels of the hierarchy. Further below might appear entries representing people, organizational units, printers, documents, or just about anything else.


Yes, definitely LDAP is hierarchical. So is DNS. In fact, DNS, LDAP, and common filesystems are by far the most widely used hierarchical databases. The topic's claim that IMS and Windows Registry are the most common is laughable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.90.235.252 (talk) 23:06, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Mistake?[edit]

but each child only has two parents

Doesn't each child only have one parent??? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.65.35.100 (talk) 12:37, 12 January 2007 (UTC).

Yes- this is a mistake. Alex Jackl 15:41, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Maybe the example about child records should not be about human children, as they usually do have two parents, both of whom may be employees. (Peter) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.226.212.139 (talk) 14:10, August 30, 2007 (UTC)

You say Data, I say Datum[edit]

I replaced the pluralization of data in the intro paragraph because data is still considered officially to be a plural noun. I do appreciate though that it is creeping into common usage to treat it as a singular collective noun. i believe in the end that may even win over but it is currnetly incorrect to tlak about "Data is". It should be "Data are". See Data. Alex Jackl 15:41, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Adabas not hierarchical[edit]

It's partially-inverted list - I used to work for them. I'm deleting the list item.Philcha 22:06, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

A bit narrow[edit]

There are other kinds of hierarchical models, for example the hierarchical statistical models used in Bayesian data analysis. These should be mentioned.

Also a tree structure is a bit limiting. Yes there are higher and lower levels in the hierarchy, but the structure needn't be a tree. Look at organisation charts, a kind of hierarchical model; there are usually plenty of dotted lines as well as the conventional parent-child relations.

--84.9.67.105 (talk) 09:31, 11 April 2008 (UTC)


The whole article is outdated, but I lack the editorial skill/technological knowledge to fix it. Rails has marvelous tools for generating hierarchical databases in a relational context, and then using the flexibility of Ruby easily represent the db. NoSQL has also raised the issue of database architecture in new ways. I almost feel like the article should start from scratch, and then hope that people mod into into currency (rather than throwing up their hands at its series of missteps) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.14.168.220 (talk) 15:43, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Bad example[edit]

Remove the disgusting example of a company keeping track of their employees chilren, unless you specify that the company in the example is comitting a crime. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.210.121 (talk) 08:12, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

The example also uses bad logic. Logically, a child has at least two parents (biologically) and those two parents could potentially work for the same company. Creating duplicate entries in the Child table would be less effective. I thought hierarchical referred more to a subclass/superclass relationship; e.g. the relationship between person and employee.