Re: UML vs. ER modelling (long)

In article <cafa549.0212290444.4e853bf9_at_posting.google.com>, "abcd" <abcd_68_at_yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

 When I joined the project I found out that my predecessor had analysts
> use UML for everything, which means class diagrams for static stuff,
> activity and sequence diagrams for business process modelling, and so
> on. So far, so good. I'm a long-time UML user, and I've succesfully
> applied it to very diverse application domains so I'm entirely familiar
> with it. However, at a closer look this system showed the following
> characteristics:
> - extremely data-centric, the data model being much more complicated
> than the business processes
> - a very very complicated data model, actually one of the most
> intricate I've ever seen
> - most (say about 80-85%) transactions are dumb, CRUD-like, real biz
> logic only covering the remaining 15-20%
>

As a guess I would say they put too much edit logic into the database, as if every object were supposed to be saved in any state.

The rule of thumb that I use is that an atomic process takes the database from one consistent state to another, that is, no half-done inconsistencies, like debiting one bank account without crediting another.

Does all this extra data structure help the business in any way? Received on Tue Dec 31 2002 - 02:32:59 CET