Re: OO and relation "impedance mismatch"
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 06:28:53 -0400
Message-ID: <uIWdnXl3kLDnh_jcRVn-qw_at_comcast.com>
"Tony Andrews" <andrewst_at_onetel.com> wrote in message news:1097140627.547656.135280_at_f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> This may be why to me, as an Oracle junkie, your scheme to dispense
> with all declarative constraints in favour of procedural triggers
> sounds rather crazy. It hasn't escaped my attention that after several
> days of this exchange, no one else has backed me up on this!
I can't speak for anyone else, but I'll say why I never backed you up on this.
My initial reaction was: dirty reads are a bad idea. I want ACID, and I'm willing to take a performance hit to get ACID. The I in acid is Isolation. End of discussion.
But I figured if I just hung around long enough, I'd learn something. Maybe theory has moved on from what I thought I knew, and I'm about to learn something new about the value of dirty reads. Or maybe I'm about to learn something new about the compromises the major platforms make with basic DBMS theory. Or maybe I'm about to learn something new about present day database design.
So I limited my participation to contributing a possible way to implement a trigger based system. And I did learn something new: that there are major platforms that can't hang a trigger on a commit. I'm shocked, but not surprised.
I'm always trying to learn something new, in addition to "speaking my truth", as Marshall puts it. Received on Thu Oct 07 2004 - 12:28:53 CEST