Discuss the meaning of "relational".

[jd-foster]

Based on the nice suggested change of @chbrandt in #353, since the block on "relational database" is somewhat vague and confusing.

---

Co-authored-by: Carlos H Brandt 482051+chbrandt@users.noreply.github.com

[github-actions]

Thank you!

Thank you for your pull request 😃

🤖 This automated message can help you check the rendered files in your submission for clarity. If you have any questions, please feel free to open an issue in {sandpaper}.

If you have files that automatically render output (e.g. R Markdown), then you should check for the following:

• 🎯 correct output
• 🖼️ correct figures
• ❓ new warnings
• ‼️ new errors

Rendered Changes

🔍 Inspect the changes: https://github.com/datacarpentry/sql-ecology-lesson/compare/md-outputs..md-outputs-PR-367

The following changes were observed in the rendered markdown documents:

 00-sql-introduction.md | 7 ++++++-
 md5sum.txt             | 2 +-
 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

What does this mean?

If you have source files that require output and figures to be generated (e.g. R Markdown), then it is important to make sure the generated figures and output are reproducible.

This output provides a way for you to inspect the output in a diff-friendly manner so that it's easy to see the changes that occur due to new software versions or randomisation.

⏱️ Updated at 2023-10-12 01:24:07 +0000

[adamancer]

Thanks for working on this! I'm on the fence about these changes. I think the clarifications could be useful, but to me the real problem with this section is how dense the preceding definition block is. Keys could probably have their own definition block, for example, along with the short paragraph about how they are used to establish/enforce relationships between tables.

[adamancer]

This is getting into the rationale for using relational databases--would it make sense to put these lines under "Why use relational databases" below?

[adamancer]

The phrase "is connected with" feels vague, and I'm not sure that this sentence adds anything beyond what's in 118. I'd consider omitting it.

[jd-foster]

Thanks for the review. I need to think further on how to organise the flow.