Re: Client/Server boundary definitions

From: Kenneth Downs <firstinit.lastname_at_lastnameplusfam.net>
Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2004 17:32:22 -0400
Message-ID: <7t3vjc.gt4.ln@mercury.downsfam.net>

Laconic2 wrote:

>
> "Kenneth Downs" <firstinit.lastname_at_lastnameplusfam.net> wrote in message
> news:nk8ujc.jh2.ln_at_mercury.downsfam.net...
>

>> I fall into that camp that likes the biz rules inside the DBMS server.
>> Otherwise interactive tools become a back door that allows people to put
>> bad data into the database.  It is also ultimately more efficient, but

> that

>> claim can spawn an entire thread on its own.

>
> Many of the people who like the biz rules inside the DBMS server also like
> the biz rules to be  "and nowhere else".
> I'm not of that camp.  And I'm not saying that you are.
>

You guessed right, I am not in that camp.

The single, only, absolute, perfect, platinum-iridium, certified, authorized, buried-in-a-vault-in-Paris copy of the biz rules is in only one place, but it is neither the client nor the server, it is the data dictionary. That is the very definition of the data dictionary. The client and server both contain *implementations* of the biz rules as is appropriate to their roles, they are the living expression of the rules, but they are not *authoritative* representations of the rules.

-- 
Kenneth Downs
Use first initial plus last name at last name plus literal "fam.net" to
email me

Received on Tue Oct 05 2004 - 16:32:22 CDT