Re: Hierarchical Model and its Relevance in the Relational Model
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2015 18:49:57 -0500
Message-Id: <20150201184957.7a34fedb.jklowden_at_speakeasy.net>
On Sat, 31 Jan 2015 18:38:26 -0800 (PST)
Derek Asirvadem <derek.asirvadem_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> > It would seem that once you introduce the average programmer to
In two cases that I had direct contact with, the database design
reflected some form of object orientation. It used the table structure
to implement an elaborated version of the entity-attribute-value table,
and self-joins to construct what you or I would have designed as
tables. Naturally, the design was, er, designed to be "flexible".
The resulting databases were impossible to understand, comprised solely
abstract nouns, and defeated the system's ability to enforce integrity
constraints. Queries were tedious to read and executed poorly. When
I was approached for ways to make it faster (because speed is the only
thing that every application programmer and his manager understands),
they were nonplussed when I suggested a Dumpster, a clean slate, and
> > a hierarchical filesystem, you can never wean him of the notion that
> > that's the "natural" structure for data.
>
> Could you please give an example of what one of those guys did, that
> you consider to be incorrect
--jkl Received on Mon Feb 02 2015 - 00:49:57 CET
