Re: Data Constraints Vs Application Constraints

Alfredo Novoa wrote:

> On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 08:37:16 -0500, Kenneth Downs
> <knode.wants.this_at_see.sigblock> wrote:
>>Do you know why they did it that way?
>The most probable reason is: incompetence.

You're right - that is the most probable reason. But diplomatically, there is every reason to take it gently and make sure that it is actually incompetence and not something else. Another probable reason is called 'ancient history'. Once upon a time, the DBMS did not have support for anything other than primary keys, and they've never gone back to fix up the design after the DBMS became able to support them.

And, it is better to find that out without calling people incompetent.   It tends to get their back up without gaining you anything.

>> There was definitely a reason and you don't want to ruffle
>> feathers by criticizing it before you know why it was done. The
>> normal argument is for portability,

Agreed with the feathers. I'm not sure I'd classify portability as a normal reason - many, many shops have no concern about portability at all. And when it is a portability issue, it often means they've coded to a perceived lowest common denominator functionality.

> But the honest and professional behavior is to say the truth.

You don't have to lie - but it is worth spending time to establish that what appears to be the case actually is the case, before you burn your bridges.

-- 
Jonathan Leffler                   #include <disclaimer.h>
Email: jleffler_at_earthlink.net, jleffler_at_us.ibm.com
Guardian of DBD::Informix v2003.04 -- http://dbi.perl.org/