RE: Semi-OT: It's the Code, Stupid!

From: "Jesse, Rich" <Rich.Jesse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2005 12:24:14 -0500

I'd also include "ignorance" and "simply too freakin old" as our ERP
system was written in the 80s using RMS indexed files (much better than
typical "flat" files) on VAX/VMS (Alphas didn't exist then) in a 4GL.
When the system was migrated to StarBase/Interbase and then to Oracle,
instead of rewriting the entire app to include the then-newish concept
of normalization (very expensive for very little benefit to the vendor's
bottom line), the 4GL's data dictionary was simply pointed to the new
tables transferred verbatim to the DB.
Which leads to us having an item's description starting in one table and
optionally finishing in another, among other fun things.

Rich

-----Original Message-----
From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of david wendelken
Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2005 11:40 AM
To: shrekdba@xxxxxxxxx; mark.powell@xxxxxxx
Cc: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Semi-OT: It's the Code, Stupid!


>> From experience I am surprised when a vendor product does not fall
into
>> the "worst-case" scenario as far as the database design, process, and
>> code is concerned.

>it results, i believe, from trying to be "database independent". 

No, simple professional incompetence is the reason.

The same problem existed long before "database independence" became
popular.


--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l



--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l

RE: Semi-OT: It's the Code, Stupid!

Other related posts: