| Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid | |
 |
 | |||
| Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid | |
|
| |||
Home -> Community -> Mailing Lists -> Oracle-L -> RE: Database Modeling- Normalization - Dinosaurs or What?
Paula - I deal with a lot of developers. I'll try to say this as charitably
as I can. I think that sometimes people that come from a Microsoft
background are a little insulated from the physical aspects of the system. I
think they focus on following Microsoft procedures (reboot, if still broke,
reinstall). Maybe data modeling isn't a part of the Microsoft curriculum,
and therefore isn't important. The other aspect is that it often seems
Microsoft focuses on the single-user paradigm, and many Microsoft developers
simply treat a server as a PC on steroids. Anyway it is probably up to
people like ourselves to educate them, so this is an excellent conversation.
Maybe others have examples where they succeeded in educating some
Microsoft-heads.
Dennis Williams
DBA, 40%OCP, 100% DBA
Lifetouch, Inc.
dwilliams_at_lifetouch.com
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 4:04 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Yes. Also, I don't. Please tell me why that matters - I think you are onto something here.
Oracle OCP DBA
-----Original Message-----
<mailto:DWILLIAMS_at_LIFETOUCH.COM> ]
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 2:39 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Paula - In reflecting on the different developers I deal with, by any chance
do these developers you are dealing with have a strong Microsoft background?
Dennis Williams
DBA
Lifetouch, Inc.
dwilliams_at_lifetouch.com
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 1:00 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
I understand what database modeling is for, the different types of normalization and denormalization and the tradeoffs in different types of systems and ultimately to the data access of the system driven (should be ) by the business requirements. The problem is I don't think anyone that does
development or provides COTS packages does and that negatively impacts my ability as a DBA to ensure data integrity. I was wondering if I was missing
some boat. If anyone else was hitting this brick wall? If there is a way to make this point clear. I was thinking of even doing a prototype - this system versus that system - same app. code, same use of system, normalized and then denormalized so I could show why the heck normalization and RI on the database is the only real way to ensure data integrity. Then show all the ways the database integrity could go wrong. I feel like I have to prove
why to use relational database design on a relational database engine built specifically for that purpose -
GEEEZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Does anyone have something
signed by the Pope to show that relational theory in a RDBMS is necessary? I think that is what it really will take.
Oracle OCP DBA
-----Original Message-----
< mailto:DWILLIAMS_at_LIFETOUCH.COM <mailto:DWILLIAMS_at_LIFETOUCH.COM> > ]
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 9:29 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Paula
I think their use of the term "object-oriented" maybe be incorrect. That
said, some new converts to object-oriented get carried away. Some even want to use Oracle in an object-oriented manner. In an effort to please everyone,
Oracle has even added object-oriented features to tables. I don't think they
are used much.
As Tom points out, the data model will need to support many purposes. One is reporting. If you don't normalize your data model, then it will be difficult or impossible to create reports.
Dennis Williams
DBA, 40%OCP, 100% DBA
Lifetouch, Inc.
dwilliams_at_lifetouch.com
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2003 6:14 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Guys,
The emphasis in many places I have worked is developing quick and dirty systems as quickly as possible and working with developers that don't seem to have very much understanding of Relational Database Theory but who prefer
to program using flat files in relational databases - calling it "object-oriented" when it truly is not. Let us just say that it is highly denormalized. As a DBA I care about data integrity, extensibility and scalability but the up and coming esp. SQL Server developer types seem to operate in a world where this doesn't matter - just buy more hardware, denormalize to make the programming easier, etc.
I have been losing this battle.
So - what is your experience with this?
What about the idea of having everyone access all objects in the views so that if need be the DBA's could in fact still make physical changes to the schemas without a large amount of rewriting of code? - as a standard
Living without normalization for most things - esp. small systems and w/o fk's except as they are maintained in the application for the sake of getting the application done quickly, cheaply.
It turns my stomach but then I wonder about my own sanity - am I making too much out of nothing? What about these stovepipe systems?
Case in-point 100,000 row table for asset management - moving different types of addresses to a separate address table and moving different types of
people to a person table. Developers are aghast at the performance implications. I am thinking perf. implications not real esp. with small amount but provides extensibility and RI with these reference tables instead
of denorma. in multiple tables. They say mostly batch inserts/updates and batch reads - but then they say some OLTP. This is a SQL Server database. I think the separate reference tables provides only way for extensibility and data integrity. I say I will write for them a joined view. They say perf. implications. - AARRRGGHH!
Oracle OCP DBA
--
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
<http://www.orafaq.net>
< http://www.orafaq.net <http://www.orafaq.net> >
--
Author: DENNIS WILLIAMS
INET: DWILLIAMS_at_LIFETOUCH.COM
Fat City Network Services -- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com
<http://www.fatcity.com>
< http://www.fatcity.com <http://www.fatcity.com> >
San Diego, California -- Mailing list and web hosting services
--
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
<http://www.orafaq.net>
--
Author: DENNIS WILLIAMS
INET: DWILLIAMS_at_LIFETOUCH.COM
Fat City Network Services -- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com
<http://www.fatcity.com>
San Diego, California -- Mailing list and web hosting services
--
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
--
Author: DENNIS WILLIAMS
INET: DWILLIAMS_at_LIFETOUCH.COM
Fat City Network Services -- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com San Diego, California -- Mailing list and web hosting services ---------------------------------------------------------------------To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message to: ListGuru_at_fatcity.com (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing). Received on Wed Mar 26 2003 - 16:48:37 CST
 |
 |