Re: Why all the max length constraints?

From: mAsterdam <mAsterdam_at_vrijdag.org>
Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 11:07:19 +0200
Message-ID: <44796788$1$31656$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl>


J M Davitt wrote:
> dawn wrote:

>> [OK, here is my next "stupid question" as I cut a path in my study of
>> the RM.  Those teachers who just want to tell this student how ignorant
>> she is are welcome to sit this out as I really am hoping to
>> understand.]

[snip]

>> Is there something about the RM that would prompt all (or most?)
>> existing implementations (however flawed) to drive developers to add in
>> these constraints for performance, space saving, or other reasons?

>
> No.
>
>> I realize there can be variable length attributes,
>> but specifying a max field length still seems to be the
>> norm (is that still the case?)

>
> Yes.

Checking OT-ness: Beyond what was specified in the conceptual model.

Why do you think this is so? (I gave one explanation in immediate reply to the OP, but I'ld be glad to see other explanations).

>> As many of you know, I work with database management systems that treat
>> all data as variable in length, while one might specify a length for
>> display purposes.

>
>
> I can't imagine that it's useful for 'Smith, Joseph' and 'Smith, John'
> to appear as identical values when, say, displayed in a field of eight
> characters. I also work with products where all data are of variable
> length. (There is a maximum, but it's huge.) PITA. This mis-feature
> accounts for a fair number of support calls.

Oops! I can imagine that. So in the product you work with you can't even hav a max-length attributes even if they /are/ in the conceptual model ?! What product is that?

[snip] Received on Sun May 28 2006 - 11:07:19 CEST

Original text of this message