On 20 Apr 2001, at 19:15, Jared Still wrote:
Date sent: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 19:15:20 -0800
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Well, why would you *not* want to denormalize during design? It seems
to me that (theoretically) ***if***
On Monday 23 April 2001 09:53, Eric D. Pierce wrote:
I guess I've been under the impression that a good design
process would be done with proper methods, including having
(legitimately tested) performance metrics.
Are you saying that is an overly idealistic approach for most
real world
On Thu, 19 Apr 2001,Jared Still scribbled on the wall in glitter crayon:
-If you're familiar with the Help Desk software 'Remedy', you will know that
-it has one of the worst schemas ever designed by man or beast. If you
-haven't seen it, you would have a hard time imagining it. Yes, worse
Hi,
I actually had to write some Perl scripts to transfer user data from a
billing software's DB to Remedy ... and I was eventually slightly
surprised that the Remedy folks were really able to deliver a ER model
even worse then the billing software's model. But they did a great job
in
William,
Have you tried to figure out Portal? Next to this beast, Remedy looks
pretty good.
David A. Barbour
Oracle DBA
"Thater, William" wrote:
On Thu, 19 Apr 2001,Jared Still scribbled on the wall in glitter crayon:
-If you're familiar with the Help Desk software 'Remedy', you will
On 19 Apr 2001, at 17:50, Jared Still wrote:
Date sent: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 17:50:27 -0800
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
...
In my experience, DBA's are scum and developers lobby the managers
with tales of how terrible life will be
I've thought that it would be interesting and lucrative work offering
third party apps companies my services in modeling and designing
databases.
Problem is, they don't understand how bad they truly are. Anyone
have ideas on selling ignorant ( no disrespect intended ) folks on
why they need
I guess I'm saying that I can't recall starting with a completely
normalized database ( just 3rd normal form here ) and then denormalize if
we found it necessary for some reason.
We've usually have had some denormalization in as soon as we started
doing physical modeling. Sigh.
Hello list,
We are beginning a proyect in ORACLE, and I wonder myself if there is
any place where I could find any real implementation, or any experience
(good or horrible.) for orienting correctly us.
I mean, which different databases should we create, which
restrictions... Something related
Hi,
If nobody in your team knows Oracle then you really
should hire a good Oracle consultant to help you start
in the good direction.
On the bad side, if nobody in your team knows Oracle
then it is not obvious to hire a good consultant.
Trust me, it won't be wasted money.
--- Beatriz
In general, be skeptical of doctrinaire statements about needing
"pure" normalized designs. Instead look into "structured
denormalization" methods, especially if performance will be an issue.
I'll disagree with that, vehemently even. :)
Build a normalized design, denormalize if you find
Jared,
I agree completely with your disagreement, except that I don't agree
that you should have disagreed since we actually agree. You did say
it better, though. :)
unnormalized != denormalized
(etc.)
As far as I know, structured denormalization is considered to be a
method for
Comments embedded
On Thursday 19 April 2001 15:31, Eric D. Pierce wrote:
...
As far as I know, structured denormalization is considered to be a
method for modification of a normalized design. There should be
disipline/method/rules that try to get the best performance increase
in a trade-off
13 matches
Mail list logo
