Re: Looking for a discussion about generic datamodels
Date: 2 Sep 2005 04:21:56 -0700
Message-ID: <1125660116.945069.206930_at_o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>
> the choice for such a data model is defended by the
> argumentation that new conceptual tables and columns can be added
> without modification of the data model.
Why would that be an advantage? Is it because your RDBMS* is hard to
use or because the developers lack expertise. In that case the obvious
solution is to get new software or new staff.
A common excuse for the design you've described is that the business
doesn't know or doesn't care to define the data requirements up front
and wants a "cheap" way to support metadata that is "user-defined" at
some point in the future. The problem is that most of those users will
lack the expertise, the time, or the inclination to do a proper job of
designing a data model. The user-defined approach therefore costs more
in the longer term by reducing the data's validity and usefulness.
(* I'm assuming throughout that we are discussing Relational databases
or at least SQL databases, please tell me if I'm wrong)
David Portas
Received on Fri Sep 02 2005 - 13:21:56 CEST