Re: A searchable datastructure for represeting attributes?
Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 10:12:45 GMT
Ilya Zvyagin 2147483647 doodled thusly:
>Do you really think all data integrity rules should be kept by
>the database itself ? What about that rules that can not ?
>What if the database is not able to support them at all or
>rules is so complicated that being supported by the DB
>they make the whole system performing so badly that it's
>better not to use the system at all ?
PMFJI. So if these data integrity rules are not kept in the DB but somewhere else, they suddenly become less heavy on the overall system performance?
What makes them more efficient by moving them away from the data they are supposed to keep the integrity of?
The demonstrably most efficient and secure place for them is near the data, not somewhere else.
>What about people who can get around validation rules - there
>are many ways to implement a system in a way that does not allow
>direct access to the database.
One would think it would be a lot easier for someone to break these rules if they are kept all over the place. As opposed to keeping them near the data they are supposed to be protecting.
The whole concept of moving these rules somewhere else does not make any sense at all. It's been tried before, many years ago. It was found to be unworkable and inefficient back then. Now we are trying to reinvent the wheel...
For the sake of what? Replacing one layer of "expertise" with another layer? (or lack thereof...)
nsouto_at_optushome.com.au.nospam Received on Fri Mar 01 2002 - 11:12:45 CET