Re: Object Table

"andrewst" <member14183_at_dbforums.com> wrote in message news:3302360.1062153244_at_dbforums.com...
> Object views are a great interface between OO applications and
> relational databases. The advantage to the OO programmer is that you
> can get an order and all its lines in one fetch (by mapping the order
> lines to a nested table column within the view), and similarly write
> data back that way. The advantage to the database designer (and to the
> business) is that the data is held in normalised relational tables that
> facilitate queries and is not compromised by an application-centric view
> of the data.

You assume that there is such thing as "Business Object". This assumption is flawed.

> I am relieved to hear that some enlightened people are actually doing
> this. Too often I just hear the nonsense that data should be STORED in
> OO tables to save the "20-30% of development effort" required to build
> the interface (object views etc.). This view assumes that the database
> has no other purpose beyond "persisting" objects when the OO application
> isn't running, and that no one will ever need to access the data other
> than through a module in that application. Just like the situation
> BEFORE relational databases were invented...

The question to ask an object propellerhead is "Do you know what scalar subquery is, for example?" No? Then, please go and learn, and next we'll talk. Because I know your stuff -- multiple inheritance, fat interfaces, polymorphism, etc -- and you are ignorant of mine. Received on Fri Aug 29 2003 - 16:44:53 CDT