Re: The IDS, the EDS and the DBMS

"Laconic2" <laconic2_at_comcast.net> wrote in message news:<rsqdncziiclazKrcRVn-tA_at_comcast.com>...
> In this discussion, I'm trying to compare two very different reasons for
> using a DBMS. I'm calling them the "integrated data store" (IDS) and the
> "encapsulated data store" (EDS). What I think I've seen is that people who
> build an IDS and people who build an EDS use the same tools and methods,
> but they use them for purposes that are not merely orthogonal to each other,
> but are nearly antithetical.
<BIG SNIP>
> What do you think?

Very interesting, and nicely defines these 2 different approaches. It seesms to me that a major difference betweem the 2 is:

IDS - responsibility for data correctness ("business rules") should be with the DBMS, not the application.

EDS - the exact opposite.

For an IDS advodate (like me), the DBMS is the "master" and the application is the "slave", merely there to present a friendly user interface; for an EDS advodate the application is the "master", and the DBMS is merely there to "persist" whatever the application chooses to store ("CRUD services" is the chilling term that comes to mind).

Do you agree, or is this DBMS v. application divide orthogonal to the IDS/EDS divide? I don't want to drag this thread down the wrong road. Received on Fri Sep 03 2004 - 14:15:13 CEST