Re: In an RDBMS, what does "Data" mean?
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 10:53:51 +0200
Message-ID: <40d55098$0$43451$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl>
Anthony W. Youngman wrote:
> ... Rules should sit
> BETWEEN the application and the data store.
In the relational approach, by separating the rules and the data store, that is exactly where they are: BETWEEN the application and the data store.
> I get the impression relational is trying to have a monolithic database
> layer which is trying to be all things to all men. And if that's the
> case, it's bound to fail. Break things up into tasks and layers, and
> don't just have "the database".
Why did you do it: because I can. A lot of presentational
application code has tabular structure. While there may be
no need to share that (it is not user data, it is code)
it is convenient to put it into something which has a
track record of storing tables.
The content of the tables resulting from this practise (the use of the
tables managed by the DBMS to contain application code)
should be treated as what it is, part of the code: apply change
management discipline, include the tables in packaged releases etc.
Received on Sun Jun 20 2004 - 10:53:51 CEST