Re: Modernization and multi-member files

Joe i think you nailed it when you said " In some ways it's not even so
much the discipline as it
is that you implement it consistently."

unfortunately most of the places i've been i never found *any* consistency
(well except that it's inconsistent)...

Thanks,
Tommy Holden



From:
Joe Pluta <joepluta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To:
Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:
07/16/2008 04:06 PM
Subject:
Re: Modernization and multi-member files



rob@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

Whether someone uses a CHAIN versus a SELECT doesn't seem to knot my
knickers.

And just to be clear, this is YOUR set of pet peeves, and is not by
itself either "right" or "wrong".

What upsets me more is people not using:
- Journalling

Even if you believe in journalling, it's not for all files. Log files,
for example, don't need journals.

- Constraints

Probably the most useful database feature, but still overused,
especially when used to implement business logic.

- Triggers

This is the one where it's really a very subjective opinion as to what
goes in a trigger and what doesn't. A whole lot of people whose
opinions I respect think no trigger should ever update another file. On
the other hand, some put all business logic in their triggers. Anyone
who knows me know I lean way towards the "less is more" discipline.

- Real date fields

See? I knew we'd eventually agree on something.

- nulls, when appropriate

The single most over-used database feature.

However you can continue to ignore all these features and still be using

only DDL instead of DDS and SELECT's versus CHAIN's.
And, again, you could be using all these feature and still be using DDS
instead of DDL and CHAIN's versus SELECT's.

It's not the tool - it's the discipline.

And if you ask three database "experts" you'll get four different
architectures. In some ways it's not even so much the discipline as it
is that you implement it consistently.

Joe