Re: Relation Schemata vs. Relation Variables

"Brian Selzer" <brian_at_selzer-software.com> wrote in message news:NBcGg.11749$kO3.6079_at_newssvr12.news.prodigy.com...

> I was just trying to be concise.

You ended up being terse. The same thing has happened to me, more times than I care to recall. Just chuckle and try again.

> If you can't see that it can happen from
> this simple example, then how would you possibly be able to see that it
can
> happen in much more complicated and subtle situations.

The solution is not to assume that we are all people of very limited vision. The solution is to present a situation that has more of the earmarks of a real situation that you are dealing with.

> It is extremely
> difficult not only to articulate the circumstances surrounding the
numerous
> instances where I've seen similar situations, but also to defend the bozos
> that designed the systems in the first place along with the people who
> wanted to change the keys. Most of the work I do is cleaning up the
messes
> that others have made.

Back in the day, that was most of the work I did. BTDT.

I've heard everthing from "what's data normalization?" to "we don't have time for all that theoretical crap?"

The problem in c.d.t. is not whether the people who designed, built, and used the systems you repair were or were not bozos. The problem is whether you are or are not writing for bozos in c.d.t. Received on Mon Aug 21 2006 - 14:33:51 CEST