Re: 4 the FAQ: Are Commercial DBMS Truly Relational?

Laconic2 wrote:
> "Paul" <paul_at_test.com> wrote in message
> news:41690aad$0$59441$ed2619ec_at_ptn-nntp-reader03.plus.net...

Snipped

>
> There is a widespread belief in this field that wrong answers with good
> performance are closer to the goal line than correct answers with poor
> performance. I will never come around to that point of view. I almost
> always want to get it right, first, then work on getting it right, and
> fast.
>
>

I agree, its usually a case of 'premature optimisation'... i.e. they use these 'tricks' for optimisation thinking that will create performance benefits, but usually the real bottle necks are else where within the system. Therefore applying these tricks only serve to complicate the matter.

By this I mean once real bottle necks have been removed, if these premature optimisation are in the code, then they create a maintenance headache, as people assume they are there because of a really performance gain was needed.

Its akin to pre or post incrementing in C/C++, only after real profiling of the system to identify that the code area with the increment is the bottle neck, should the developers worry about the increments performance.

Also, IMHO, premature optimisation tend to create designs that are fragile to future changes.

Andrew Received on Sun Oct 10 2004 - 13:51:53 CDT