Re: RM's Canonical database (was: Bob's 'Self-aggrandizing ignorant' Count)

On 3 Jul 2006 09:04:21 -0700, "Marshall" <marshall.spight_at_gmail.com> wrote:

>It is one thing to say, "given the limitations of the dbms we are
>using,
>and other practical considerations, we have decided to implement
>business rules in a middle tier, and require all application code that
>issues updates to use that tier." It is a different thing to say
>"business
>rules shouldn't go in the dbms."
>
>The first one is situationally-dependent; it might be a good idea
>or not depending on a variety of practical considerations. The
>second one is just false.

Repeatedly asserting that business rules should always go in the DBMS doesn't make it more true.

I'm not saying that they shouldn't ... but that /sometimes/ they shouldn't.

-- 
Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
I'm giving the best advice I have. You get to decide if it's true for you.