Re: Keeping schema static as objects are added

From: Arthur Ward <art.ward_at_noreply.xx>
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 18:19:06 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <k988uq$qfd$> wrote:

>> Thankfully the one thing you haven't mentioned is "object oriented".
>> Keep it that way.
>> Art
> Art, the challenge I ran into with classes is persisting them in rdbms.
> I have no clues beyond temp tables or some weird query caching pump.
> Both so far seem unacceptable. Would you share your thoughts on how I
> can get it done, please?

Unless you business makes it's money managing objects you shouldn't be "persisting" objects at all. I just looked in the yellow pages and I didn't see anyone under the object management classification.

My guess is you don't see any difference between the state of the members of an object, and facts about the enterprise of interest. If you don't see the difference then I'd be doing your customers and users a real disservice by giving you ideas for how to go on screwing up their information so they can't exploit it.

To repeat someone eles, "your are not taking a sensible approach".

Art Received on Thu Nov 29 2012 - 19:19:06 CET

Original text of this message