Click here to Skip to main content
15,118,865 members

Welcome to the Lounge

   

For discussing anything related to a software developer's life but is not for programming questions. Got a programming question?

The Lounge is rated Safe For Work. If you're about to post something inappropriate for a shared office environment, then don't post it. No ads, no abuse, and no programming questions. Trolling, (political, climate, religious or whatever) will result in your account being removed.

 
GeneralRe: Imposing data type and length restrictions at the database level is stupid! - Part II Pin
Member 798912228-Aug-21 5:54
MemberMember 798912228-Aug-21 5:54 
GeneralRe: Imposing data type and length restrictions at the database level is stupid! - Part II Pin
Gerry Schmitz28-Aug-21 5:47
mveGerry Schmitz28-Aug-21 5:47 
GeneralRe: Imposing data type and length restrictions at the database level is stupid! - Part II Pin
englebart28-Aug-21 6:04
professionalenglebart28-Aug-21 6:04 
GeneralRe: Imposing data type and length restrictions at the database level is stupid! - Part II Pin
Eddy Vluggen28-Aug-21 9:56
professionalEddy Vluggen28-Aug-21 9:56 
GeneralRe: Imposing data type and length restrictions at the database level is stupid! - Part II Pin
5teveH29-Aug-21 21:56
Member5teveH29-Aug-21 21:56 
GeneralRe: Imposing data type and length restrictions at the database level is stupid! - Part II Pin
Eddy Vluggen30-Aug-21 16:42
professionalEddy Vluggen30-Aug-21 16:42 
GeneralRe: Imposing data type and length restrictions at the database level is stupid! - Part II Pin
Asday30-Aug-21 7:56
MemberAsday30-Aug-21 7:56 
GeneralRe: Imposing data type and length restrictions at the database level is stupid! - Part II Pin
jschell5-Sep-21 9:31
Memberjschell5-Sep-21 9:31 
5teveH wrote:
You are going to have to take my word for it, but I am 100% sure that with less disk, less CPU and less memory, I can deliver better performance than could be achieved using a traditional RDBMS. Also, indexing data does not have a performance hit. And the greater the volume of data, the more confident I would be that performance would be better.


And from a different thread...

5teveH wrote:
after nearly 40 years of working with this database, (Pick/Universe),


I have been dealing with database for 40 years. Different databases. Different industries. Different types of enterprise systems.

And during that time I have also seen databases change. For instance just the infrastructure that they run on has changed enough that things that used to matter do not and things that were never even looked at before matter much more now. So that 40 years of experience doesn't even translate well into deciding what one should do now versus one did then. About the only real thing it allows is telling stories and being able better to recognize 'tribal knowledge' which is based on something that is no longer valid.

The first comment it completely open ended without restrictions and not even providing specific definitions.

In my experience making broad sweeping claims about anything always leads to one thing - failure. Followed by a lot of rationalizations and back sliding about what was really meant by the original claims.

For starters "performance" can mean almost anything but in the real world customers have real needs for what "performance" means. They don't care about benchmarks. They do care about how long they have to sit around waiting for results to show up on the screen and how long it takes to come up with new features that they think they need. (The two are not complementary.)

Moreover in terms of actual performance and the enterprise level performance is achieved by requirements modifications and not technology. One might gain a 1% boost with technology but might gain 6,000% by changing requirements. That last is based on a real world example.
GeneralThought of the Day Pin
OriginalGriff27-Aug-21 5:09
mveOriginalGriff27-Aug-21 5:09 
GeneralRe: Thought of the Day Pin
Mike Hankey27-Aug-21 5:59
professionalMike Hankey27-Aug-21 5:59 
GeneralRe: Thought of the Day Pin
Kschuler27-Aug-21 6:01
MemberKschuler27-Aug-21 6:01 
GeneralRe: Thought of the Day Pin
User 991608027-Aug-21 6:10
professionalUser 991608027-Aug-21 6:10 
GeneralRe: Thought of the Day Pin
jeron127-Aug-21 6:26
Memberjeron127-Aug-21 6:26 
GeneralRe: Thought of the Day Pin
Slacker00727-Aug-21 7:02
professionalSlacker00727-Aug-21 7:02 
GeneralRe: Thought of the Day Pin
Member 1532961327-Aug-21 7:24
MemberMember 1532961327-Aug-21 7:24 
GeneralRe: Thought of the Day Pin
DRHuff27-Aug-21 9:04
MemberDRHuff27-Aug-21 9:04 
GeneralRe: Thought of the Day Pin
Eddy Vluggen27-Aug-21 17:07
professionalEddy Vluggen27-Aug-21 17:07 
GeneralImposing data type and length restrictions at the database level is stupid! Pin
5teveH27-Aug-21 3:26
Member5teveH27-Aug-21 3:26 
GeneralRe: Imposing data type and length restrictions at the database level is stupid! PinPopular
Richard Deeming27-Aug-21 3:36
mveRichard Deeming27-Aug-21 3:36 
GeneralRe: Imposing data type and length restrictions at the database level is stupid! Pin
5teveH27-Aug-21 4:02
Member5teveH27-Aug-21 4:02 
GeneralRe: Imposing data type and length restrictions at the database level is stupid! Pin
obermd27-Aug-21 4:39
Memberobermd27-Aug-21 4:39 
GeneralRe: Imposing data type and length restrictions at the database level is stupid! Pin
RickZeeland27-Aug-21 3:43
mveRickZeeland27-Aug-21 3:43 
GeneralRe: Imposing data type and length restrictions at the database level is stupid! Pin
raddevus27-Aug-21 4:09
mvaraddevus27-Aug-21 4:09 
GeneralRe: Imposing data type and length restrictions at the database level is stupid! Pin
User 991608027-Aug-21 5:29
professionalUser 991608027-Aug-21 5:29 
GeneralRe: Imposing data type and length restrictions at the database level is stupid! Pin
raddevus27-Aug-21 5:44
mvaraddevus27-Aug-21 5:44 

General General    News News    Suggestion Suggestion    Question Question    Bug Bug    Answer Answer    Joke Joke    Praise Praise    Rant Rant    Admin Admin   

Use Ctrl+Left/Right to switch messages, Ctrl+Up/Down to switch threads, Ctrl+Shift+Left/Right to switch pages.