Re: 4 the FAQ: Are Commercial DBMS Truly Relational?
From: Kenneth Downs <firstinit.lastname_at_lastnameplusfam.net>
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 17:08:58 -0400
Message-ID: <ad8ckc.jf9.ln_at_mercury.downsfam.net>
>
> I've also found that, paradoxically, a lot of the most useful work I've
> done has actually been getting rid of code, rather than writing it.
>
> Sometimes code is built up piecemeal until you can't really see what it
> does. Then you delete maybe 90% of the code and it actually works better
> than before. Of course, you have to be very careful you don't remove
> some obscure logic that was necessary (maybe a workaround for some rare
> problem or DBMS bug that wasn't documented properly). But I find usually
> that, as well as providing performance benefits, such an exercise
> actually highlights hidden logical errors with the existing code that
> no-one had every noticed before.
>
> Paul.
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 17:08:58 -0400
Message-ID: <ad8ckc.jf9.ln_at_mercury.downsfam.net>
Paul wrote:
>> Have you ever "optimized" the work of others after the fact? I was in a >> situation once where I optimized several programs, gaining performance >> improvements in every case counting between 1-3 orders of magnitude. The >> supervisor was astonished and asked me how I did it. In each case the >> answer was the same, the program was doing too much work. It would do a >> lot of wrong work, and then somewhere do the right work. The entire >> optimization effort was in reducing the program to doing only what was >> necessary. There may have been a couple of tricks-of-the-trade for the >> platform in question, but mostly it was eliminating work.
>
> I've also found that, paradoxically, a lot of the most useful work I've
> done has actually been getting rid of code, rather than writing it.
>
> Sometimes code is built up piecemeal until you can't really see what it
> does. Then you delete maybe 90% of the code and it actually works better
> than before. Of course, you have to be very careful you don't remove
> some obscure logic that was necessary (maybe a workaround for some rare
> problem or DBMS bug that wasn't documented properly). But I find usually
> that, as well as providing performance benefits, such an exercise
> actually highlights hidden logical errors with the existing code that
> no-one had every noticed before.
>
> Paul.
I think you explained it better than I did.
-- Kenneth Downs Use first initial plus last name at last name plus literal "fam.net" to email meReceived on Sun Oct 10 2004 - 23:08:58 CEST