Re: Dreaming About Redesigning SQL
From: Steve Lancour <stevel_at_lancour.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 10:20:24 -0500
Message-ID: <N9WdnZe9vtmD4D-iRVn-iw_at_comcast.com>
>
> posted.
>
>
> level
>
>
>
> We cannot agree on that point. There are too many database operations that
> never go through QA.
>
>
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 10:20:24 -0500
Message-ID: <N9WdnZe9vtmD4D-iRVn-iw_at_comcast.com>
Bob Badour wrote:
> "Steve Lancour" <stevel_at_lancour.com> wrote in message
> news:CsGdnZoN95XJJjyiRVn-jw_at_comcast.com...
>
>>Mikito Harakiri wrote: >> >> >>>"Steve Lancour" <stevel_at_lancour.com> wrote in message >>>news:mKudnYI38-U5KTyiRVn-gw_at_comcast.com... >>> >>> >>>>No, I postulate only one mistake. If the DBA makes a mistake in setting >>>>up the constraint the applications may be perfect and yet still corrupt >>>>data. Same as if there were a mistake in the example Pick code I
>
> posted.
>
>>> >>>A mistake in high abstraction language is much less likely then in low
>
> level
>
>>>language. >>> >>> >> >>I don't know. Perhaps. But if we can agree that the QA efforts on both
>
>
> We cannot agree on that point. There are too many database operations that
> never go through QA.
>
>
Perhaps in systems you've built but not in mine. Received on Fri Oct 31 2003 - 16:20:24 CET