On Tue, 06 Jul 2004, damorgan_at_x.washington.edu wrote:
> Luch wrote:
>
>> Did some research (and tried it myself) and this is what I
>> understand from object tables (or tables that have one if its
>> fields being an object type) in 9i.... In order to make a
>> change later on to the object, any table that is using it
>> (wheter it is one field or an object table) would first have
>> to be dropped. Otherwise it gives dependency errors. Is this
>> correct? This doesn't make sense to me... How can it be
>> expected that an object can never later be changed (adding
>> another field, increasing a varchar2 field, etc). This makes
>> them "useless" to me to want to use an object in a table. -
>> Replace nospam with hotmail for e-mail.
>
> I think correct but your assumption about it being useless is
> incorrect.
>
> You are supposed to data model your schema then code. If you
> hava some overwhelming need to redefine objects on-the-fly it
> only demonstrates a lack of putting together proper
> specifications before you started banging out code.
I've never once been on a project where the datamodel didn't
change during the lifetime of the project. I guess you have.
--
Galen Boyer
Received on Wed Jul 07 2004 - 06:42:18 CDT
