SQL Clone
SQLServerCentral is supported by Redgate
 
Log in  ::  Register  ::  Not logged in
 
 
 


Writing Nearly Codeless Apps: Part 3


Writing Nearly Codeless Apps: Part 3

Author
Message
Julien.Chappel
Julien.Chappel
SSC Rookie
SSC Rookie (28 reputation)SSC Rookie (28 reputation)SSC Rookie (28 reputation)SSC Rookie (28 reputation)SSC Rookie (28 reputation)SSC Rookie (28 reputation)SSC Rookie (28 reputation)SSC Rookie (28 reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 28 Visits: 44
I like the idea generally, but itshould have been pointed out that the system is not a limitation but a framework only. If the system fails then everything fails within it.

I don'nt like the philosophy "put your trust in the system not in genius." This rubbish. Even the system is invented by geniuses, like Henry Ford (inventing the most hated system the production line). I would like to defet this philosophy with the Roman Army example. Geniuses: what would have been the Roman Army without Cornelius Scipio (reorganising the tactical deployment suit to the situation), Aemilius Paulus (Introducing new tactics to beat the famous macedon falanx at Pydna), Gaius Marius (reorganising the Roman Army so that after decades of disastorous defets it was capable to win battles again-Aquae Sixtee; Vercelle-, Julius Ceasar... and the list goes on of these ancient geniuses. Also the Roman Army is full of individual heroes.

regards
Julien
David Ziffer
David Ziffer
Old Hand
Old Hand (313 reputation)Old Hand (313 reputation)Old Hand (313 reputation)Old Hand (313 reputation)Old Hand (313 reputation)Old Hand (313 reputation)Old Hand (313 reputation)Old Hand (313 reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 313 Visits: 203
Julien.Chappel (10/20/2010)
I don'nt like the philosophy "put your trust in the system not in genius." This rubbish.

I agree that we always need geniuses, and I never meant to imply that we can dispense with them. The question is how we use them.

To use the military analogy, you can either put your genius in a uniform and hope that he leads the troops to a victory mostly through fortunate circumstance (because there is a limit to the effect of a single genius on the battlefield no matter how good he is). Or you can instead use the genius to design a system that allows all ordinary foot soldiers to perform 100% better.

I prefer the latter approach because it distributes the effect of the genius more effectively. Also you lose fewer geniuses that way.
Julien.Chappel
Julien.Chappel
SSC Rookie
SSC Rookie (28 reputation)SSC Rookie (28 reputation)SSC Rookie (28 reputation)SSC Rookie (28 reputation)SSC Rookie (28 reputation)SSC Rookie (28 reputation)SSC Rookie (28 reputation)SSC Rookie (28 reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 28 Visits: 44
Hi David,

I think we have a different point of view about geniuses. Let me quote you: "Or you can instead use the genius to design a system ."
In my book if you can use a genius he/she is not a genius anymore. There are certain circumstances when the system can force a genius to back down temporally (Galileo Galilei) but certainly not use them. Galilei's last words on his deathbed were "Eppur si muove". It means And yet it moves. Implementation in its context: The Eart is moving whatever the Vatican says. Giordano Bruno rather died on the pire then retract his ideas.
So don't try to use genius because you end up with mediocre sapling.

Just anoter thought. Geniuses who design systems never become part of the system. It is only looks that way. They are controlling the system. Bill Gates for example. He can walk away from Microsoft any time, he still remains one of the most richest man in the world.

Well we are far away from SQL Server and Writing Nearly Codeless Apps but I enjoyed the exchange of ideas.

reagrds
Julien
Julien.Chappel
Julien.Chappel
SSC Rookie
SSC Rookie (28 reputation)SSC Rookie (28 reputation)SSC Rookie (28 reputation)SSC Rookie (28 reputation)SSC Rookie (28 reputation)SSC Rookie (28 reputation)SSC Rookie (28 reputation)SSC Rookie (28 reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 28 Visits: 44
Hi David,

I think we have a different point of view about geniuses. Let me quote you: "Or you can instead use the genius to design a system ."
In my book if you can use a genius he/she is not a genius anymore. There are certain circumstances when the system can force a genius to back down temporally (Galileo Galilei) but certainly not use them. Galilei's last words on his deathbed were "Eppur si muove". It means And yet it moves. Implementation in its context: The Eart is moving whatever the Vatican says. Giordano Bruno rather died on the pire then retract his ideas.
So don't try to use genius because you end up with mediocre sapling.

Just anoter thought. Geniuses who design systems never become part of the system. It is only looks that way. They are controlling the system. Bill Gates for example. He can walk away from Microsoft any time, he still remains one of the most richest man in the world.

Well we are far away from SQL Server and Writing Nearly Codeless Apps but I enjoyed the exchange of ideas.

reagrds
Julien
Pantelis Magos
Pantelis Magos
Forum Newbie
Forum Newbie (3 reputation)Forum Newbie (3 reputation)Forum Newbie (3 reputation)Forum Newbie (3 reputation)Forum Newbie (3 reputation)Forum Newbie (3 reputation)Forum Newbie (3 reputation)Forum Newbie (3 reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 3 Visits: 20
Where are the links for Parts 1 and 2?
David Ziffer
David Ziffer
Old Hand
Old Hand (313 reputation)Old Hand (313 reputation)Old Hand (313 reputation)Old Hand (313 reputation)Old Hand (313 reputation)Old Hand (313 reputation)Old Hand (313 reputation)Old Hand (313 reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 313 Visits: 203
Pantelis Magos (10/21/2010)
Where are the links for Parts 1 and 2?

Just do a search (using SQL Server Central's Search box) on the article title.
bjl2
bjl2
Forum Newbie
Forum Newbie (6 reputation)Forum Newbie (6 reputation)Forum Newbie (6 reputation)Forum Newbie (6 reputation)Forum Newbie (6 reputation)Forum Newbie (6 reputation)Forum Newbie (6 reputation)Forum Newbie (6 reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 6 Visits: 24
I enjoyed your articles, and I look forward to the rest of them, and to trying out the framework you discuss.

I'm neither a DBA, nor a Developer (yet); I work in QA, so please excuse any ignorance on my part. This method of development is fantastic, from a QA perspective, but would it not be a performance nightmare for many applications?

The first article said "The objective here is to produce small to medium database-based applications". The application I work with daily is certainly no Amazon.com. It is a client-server app with around 1200 tables, but most of them are small. A few of them may reach a couple of million records, though. Does that put it outside the scope of the methodology proposed in the article?

Performance, especially of long-running processes, is a constant issue for our largest customers, and we continually have to talk even large, well-funded organizations into upgrading their servers.

I would much appreciate some discussion of performance implications in the future articles of this series.

Thank you,

Ben Langton
charles-600573
charles-600573
Grasshopper
Grasshopper (10 reputation)Grasshopper (10 reputation)Grasshopper (10 reputation)Grasshopper (10 reputation)Grasshopper (10 reputation)Grasshopper (10 reputation)Grasshopper (10 reputation)Grasshopper (10 reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 10 Visits: 12
I am not sure I am missing something here.
You state:
"This example tracks the progress of auditing in just one table. All the tables in the database, without exception, operate on this same principle"
mmm.
Surely if you delete a record from the AdmUser Table (hopefully the constraint won't let you), it would mess up.
Cheers
David Ziffer
David Ziffer
Old Hand
Old Hand (313 reputation)Old Hand (313 reputation)Old Hand (313 reputation)Old Hand (313 reputation)Old Hand (313 reputation)Old Hand (313 reputation)Old Hand (313 reputation)Old Hand (313 reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 313 Visits: 203
charles-600573 (10/26/2010)
I am not sure I am missing something here.
You state:
"This example tracks the progress of auditing in just one table. All the tables in the database, without exception, operate on this same principle"
mmm.
Surely if you delete a record from the AdmUser Table (hopefully the constraint won't let you), it would mess up.
Cheers

Certainly you can put business rules in your app that prevent you from deleting things that should not be deleted. But that is (properly) up to the business rules, not the database.
Go


Permissions

You can't post new topics.
You can't post topic replies.
You can't post new polls.
You can't post replies to polls.
You can't edit your own topics.
You can't delete your own topics.
You can't edit other topics.
You can't delete other topics.
You can't edit your own posts.
You can't edit other posts.
You can't delete your own posts.
You can't delete other posts.
You can't post events.
You can't edit your own events.
You can't edit other events.
You can't delete your own events.
You can't delete other events.
You can't send private messages.
You can't send emails.
You can read topics.
You can't vote in polls.
You can't upload attachments.
You can download attachments.
You can't post HTML code.
You can't edit HTML code.
You can't post IFCode.
You can't post JavaScript.
You can post emoticons.
You can't post or upload images.

Select a forum

































































































































































SQLServerCentral


Search