Re: Modelling Considered Harmful

From: Paul <paul_at_test.com>
Date: Fri, 06 May 2005 09:29:22 +0100
Message-ID: <427b2ae2$0$534$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader03.plus.net>

mAsterdam wrote:

>> The case can also be stated that databases are NOT models of reality.

>
> They are not, agreed.
>

>> They are rather record-keeping systems.

>
> Yep.

I don't understand this point at all. To me it seems almost a tautology that databases are models of reality (unless of course they're modelling some virtual world that doesn't exist outside the database).

Why is a "record-keeping system" not identical to a "model"?

Is it because databases explicitly list facts one by one, rather that use things like formulae that one would expect in a "model"? I don't think there is any requirement for a model to be one or the other of these things. It's just that models of some things (like physical laws) have many underlying patterns that lend themselves to concise representation using formulae. Whereas things that databases are traditionally used for (business details) don't have so many underlying patterns.

If I'm barking up the wrong tree here, please let me know the essential difference between the two concepts. Maybe with some examples. So if I'm presented with some collection of facts I can say either "this is a model" or "this is a record-keeping system".

Paul. Received on Fri May 06 2005 - 03:29:22 CDT