Re: RI - pros and cons

If the application is implemented correctly, it should not be apparent whether RI exists in the DB or not. Putting it in the DB will keep the application honest. From what I have seen, without RI in the database, you can kiss integrity good-bye.

-Peter

Ed Stevens wrote:
>
> I feel stupid even posting this question but there's trouble brewing in River
> City. I'm getting caught between my "partner" DBA (with whom I have many
> philosophical differences) and the developers.
>
> New application being developed. Four rather simple tables - header data,
> detail data, and a couple of reference/look-up tables. Developers want RI and I
> agree. DBA says "RI is more trouble than its' worth. You should take care of
> it in your application." I'm caught in the middle, stongly disagreeing (that's
> putting it diplomaticly) with the other DBA but having to maintain a working
> relationship. He makes the claim "all the other DBA's I read on MetaLink say RI
> is too much trouble" but won't produce evidence.
>
> Anyone want to comment on the technical merits of RI vs. not. I've always felt
> that the benefits of RI (and normalized tables) was so obvious as to not even
> require any further justification. Do I need to be re-educated, or . . . .
Received on Thu Mar 21 2002 - 07:59:22 CST