From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Information Principle redirects here, but is not mentioned[edit]

Either discuss it in the article or remove the redirect, so perhaps an actual page about it could be made? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:24, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Should it redirect here: Laws of information systems? Peter Flass (talk) 13:28, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Codasyl vs. CODASYL[edit]

I changed all occurrences of the first to the second, per reference.[1]Peter Flass (talk) 13:22, 21 February 2014 (UTC)


  1. ^ Charles Babbage Institute. "Conference on Data Systems Languages Records, 1959-1987. Finding Aid". Retrieved Feb 20, 2014. 

All SQL?[edit]

From the lede:

the most popular database systems since the 1980s have all supported the relational model as represented by the SQL language

I find that hard to believe given the NoSQL trend/hype of the last decade. CouchDB, MongoDB, Apache Cassandra, etc., all qualify as DBMSs as defined in this article, but don't support the relational model or SQL.

More generally, the lede seems rather slanted towards SQL. Does anyone have a reliable source that quantifies the popularity of SQL/NoSQL? On NoSQL, I found this web page that purports to show that at least in terms of number of major systems, RDBMSs are now in the minority. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 18:53, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

But, has an invividual NoSQL system actually made it into the ranks of "the most puplar databases systems"? —SamB (talk) 18:38, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
According to that very same website, yes. In its popularity ranking, Mongo currently ranks 4, Cassandra 8, Redis 10. Among the top 20 systems, at most 13 support SQL. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 18:54, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
The article you cite says nothing of the kind. It says that its figures "show that relational systems currently totally dominate the database market, but NoSQL systems have a strong upcoming trend" Its figures show 6 of the top 7 being relational, together accounting for about 95% of the market. Mhkay (talk) 22:21, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
Where's this 95% figure? I don't see it. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 11:02, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

(see Implementation section below)[edit]

(see Implementation section below) is repeated twice, but no section with this title can be found — Preceding unsigned comment added by Velocipedus (talkcontribs) 01:27, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

That section was removed 2½ years ago; it was a summary of the separate article Database management system that was merged into this article. I've removed the references as the treatment of DBMSs no longer has any separate section or article. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 12:22, 26 November 2015 (UTC)


How is it possible that the word databank is not even mentioned in this article? The difference between the two or the lack of one is badly explained in that article. --Espoo (talk) 05:56, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Database. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:30, 24 May 2017 (UTC)