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

From: David Cressey <dcressey_at_verizon.net>
Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2006 12:24:29 GMT
Message-ID: <16tqg.3769$%61.986@trndny09>

"Ron Jeffries" <ronjeffries_at_acm.org> wrote in message news:bmlja2h16e5qi1q749eeu3f0p7fqc4p7fs_at_4ax.com...

> Are you concerned about people going "around" the middle tier, perhaps?
I'd
> think that could be obviated with some simple security measures, couldn't
it?

I would suggest that setting up the middle tier as the defender of the database against unruly data is just laying the groundwork for a repeat of the same old debate between DBMS types and agile programmers that we've seen so often over the last 35 years.

If the "middle tier" is as "agile" as some people want it to be, the data will be too unreliable for some people for certain uses. If the middle tier is as unchanging as others want it to be, the data will reflect a model of the problem domain that is no longer accepted as valid by a lot of the stakeholders.

Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose. Received on Tue Jul 04 2006 - 07:24:29 CDT