Re: OOP - a question about database access
From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_golden.net>
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 12:04:01 -0500
Message-ID: <47WdnQm8ZqQ9TTai4p2dnA_at_golden.net>
> "Costin Cozianu" <c_cozianu_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:bogabu$1dmsv4$1_at_ID-152540.news.uni-berlin.de...
> > [snip]
> > > Why would a database be a good place to validate text from an
> > > input field, wouldn't it make everyone's life a lot easier if data
were
> > > validated before making a write to a DB?
> >
> > Well, just because you typically *have to* do it in three places
> >
> > 1. First in the client (JavaScript)
> > 2. Second in the middle tier (ASP.NET, Java, etc. )
> > 3. Have it as a constraint defined in the database.
> >
> > Any solution less than all three is pretty much guaranteed to be a bad
> > solution
>
> I'd don't care how many tiers enforce integrity constraints of various
> kinds, but I don't see why in the 21st century we still seem to think we
> have to *hand* code the checks into all those tiers. Since the rules do
> need to be enforced in the database, and since we have to interrogate the
> database for the data anyway, we ought to expect it to be able to deliver
> the
> constraints along with all the other metadata (e.g. data type,
nullability,
> or whatever) at run-time. Instead of constantly, everywhere, for all
time,
> re-implementing the same checks (and ensuring simultaneous and
comprehensive
> rollout of all changes in those myriad implementations, forever) we need
to
> have a way to make the various tiers dynamically configure themselves from
> the database constraints at run-time. I don't care if it's done with
> code-generators or APIs or "constraint servers" or what, but I sure as
heck
> want the enforcement fully automated and hidden from view, and I want the
> database alone to drive it.
>
> I know I'm not going to see any such standards for a very long time, so
for
> now I'd be happy to see more people recognize that it's madness to
approach
> data validation the way we're doing it now--piecemeal, by hand, with no
> assurance of consistency.
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 12:04:01 -0500
Message-ID: <47WdnQm8ZqQ9TTai4p2dnA_at_golden.net>
"Roy Hann" <rhann_at_globalnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:bogf1i$r6p$1_at_hercules.btinternet.com...
> "Costin Cozianu" <c_cozianu_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:bogabu$1dmsv4$1_at_ID-152540.news.uni-berlin.de...
> > [snip]
> > > Why would a database be a good place to validate text from an
> > > input field, wouldn't it make everyone's life a lot easier if data
were
> > > validated before making a write to a DB?
> >
> > Well, just because you typically *have to* do it in three places
> >
> > 1. First in the client (JavaScript)
> > 2. Second in the middle tier (ASP.NET, Java, etc. )
> > 3. Have it as a constraint defined in the database.
> >
> > Any solution less than all three is pretty much guaranteed to be a bad
> > solution
>
> I'd don't care how many tiers enforce integrity constraints of various
> kinds, but I don't see why in the 21st century we still seem to think we
> have to *hand* code the checks into all those tiers. Since the rules do
> need to be enforced in the database, and since we have to interrogate the
> database for the data anyway, we ought to expect it to be able to deliver
> the
> constraints along with all the other metadata (e.g. data type,
nullability,
> or whatever) at run-time. Instead of constantly, everywhere, for all
time,
> re-implementing the same checks (and ensuring simultaneous and
comprehensive
> rollout of all changes in those myriad implementations, forever) we need
to
> have a way to make the various tiers dynamically configure themselves from
> the database constraints at run-time. I don't care if it's done with
> code-generators or APIs or "constraint servers" or what, but I sure as
heck
> want the enforcement fully automated and hidden from view, and I want the
> database alone to drive it.
>
> I know I'm not going to see any such standards for a very long time, so
for
> now I'd be happy to see more people recognize that it's madness to
approach
> data validation the way we're doing it now--piecemeal, by hand, with no
> assurance of consistency.
Hear! Hear! Received on Fri Nov 07 2003 - 18:04:01 CET