Path: text.usenetserver.com!out01a.usenetserver.com!news.usenetserver.com!in02.usenetserver.com!news.usenetserver.com!postnews.google.com!l12g2000cwl.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: "hpuxrac" <johnbhurley@sbcglobal.net>
Newsgroups: comp.databases.oracle.server
Subject: Re: Oracle Unit Testing
Date: 12 Dec 2006 09:55:06 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <1165946106.430301.200370@l12g2000cwl.googlegroups.com>
References: <1165935254.832348.74350@f1g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
   <1165935372.231054.171760@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com>
   <CtidnWGD0rccTePYnZ2dnUVZ_v-tnZ2d@comcast.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 208.44.49.5
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1165946113 14493 127.0.0.1 (12 Dec 2006 17:55:13 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 17:55:13 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <CtidnWGD0rccTePYnZ2dnUVZ_v-tnZ2d@comcast.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.0; .NET CLR 1.1.4322),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
X-HTTP-Via: 1.0 PROXY
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: l12g2000cwl.googlegroups.com; posting-host=208.44.49.5;
   posting-account=Dz_3bQ0AAAC5LZNB2NPEJz1sl_a8qcDY
Xref: usenetserver.com comp.databases.oracle.server:419034
X-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 12:55:13 EST (text.usenetserver.com)


Tim Arnold wrote:
> "hpuxrac" <johnbhurley@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:1165935372.231054.171760@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > WebCom Systems wrote:
> > > A good example of Oracle Unit Testing can be found at
> > >
> > > http://www.oracleunittesting.com
> > >
> > > Includes source code and pdf download of site.
> >
> > Looks like a train wreck to me.
> >
>
> I don't disagree, but why do you think so? Some developers at my shop are
> really into this.

The whole concept of putting an object layer around every table in a
relational database typically produces applications that are don't
scale well, perform terribly, and are maintenance nightmares.

It was very in in the late 90's ... kind of client server gone wild
into the 4th dimension.  It did produce some very lucrative consulting
gigs.

To produce scalable applications one should take advantage of the
features of a relational system not try to pretend that the database
doesn't exist.