Path: news.easynews.com!newsfeed1.easynews.com!easynews.com!easynews!news.he.net!news-hog.berkeley.edu!ucberkeley!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: abcd_68@yahoo.co.uk (abcd) Newsgroups: comp.databases.theory,comp.databases.object,comp.infosystems,comp.lang.java.beans,comp.lang.java.databases Subject: Re: UML vs. ER modelling (long) Date: 1 Jan 2003 08:48:16 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 14 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.140.9.155 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1041439696 27559 127.0.0.1 (1 Jan 2003 16:48:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 1 Jan 2003 16:48:16 GMT Xref: newsfeed1.easynews.com comp.databases.theory:24224 comp.databases.object:23515 comp.infosystems:2815 comp.lang.java.beans:14589 comp.lang.java.databases:42144 X-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Jan 2003 09:48:33 MST (news.easynews.com) > Does all this extra data structure help the business in any way? The short answer is: Yes. The DB schema is complicated because the company's business is complicated. Actually, they achieved market leadership exactly thanks to their unparalleled commercial flexibility. As to the atomicity of the business processes, I of course agree with you. However, IMHO the problem is not that we want to save every object in every possible state, but the intrinsic complexity of the domain model, at least from a data point of view. Cheers, andy