Why is database integrity so impopular ?

#21

eric.bouchardlefebvre (AT) gmail (DOT) com wrote:

Quote:

What is wrong with modern DB design approaches? And what's the point
of using a big relational DB without the benefits of integrity and
normalization?

Probably because the talented people at the software vendors are the sales droids.
The system was originally designed by someone who didn't have a clue and they managed
to sell a few copies and kept on going. Any competent database or developers or
systems analyst types likely didn't stay very long either. And management is
cracking the whips on generally mediocre people to get the product out as quickly as
they can. "To heck with bugs. It's features that count."

So how's that for generalizing? <smile>

I really enjoy reading the WTF and other similar blogs for such stories. And then
there's comp.risks where mistakes have killed people.

Tony

--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
read the entire thread of messages.
Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at
http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm
Tony's Microsoft Access Blog - http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/

#22

eric.bouchardlefebvre (AT) gmail (DOT) com wrote:

Quote:

What is wrong with modern DB design approaches? And what's the point
of using a big relational DB without the benefits of integrity and
normalization?

Probably because the talented people at the software vendors are the sales droids.
The system was originally designed by someone who didn't have a clue and they managed
to sell a few copies and kept on going. Any competent database or developers or
systems analyst types likely didn't stay very long either. And management is
cracking the whips on generally mediocre people to get the product out as quickly as
they can. "To heck with bugs. It's features that count."

So how's that for generalizing? <smile>

I really enjoy reading the WTF and other similar blogs for such stories. And then
there's comp.risks where mistakes have killed people.

Tony

--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
read the entire thread of messages.
Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at
http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm
Tony's Microsoft Access Blog - http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/

#23

eric.bouchardlefebvre (AT) gmail (DOT) com wrote:

Quote:

What is wrong with modern DB design approaches? And what's the point
of using a big relational DB without the benefits of integrity and
normalization?

Probably because the talented people at the software vendors are the sales droids.
The system was originally designed by someone who didn't have a clue and they managed
to sell a few copies and kept on going. Any competent database or developers or
systems analyst types likely didn't stay very long either. And management is
cracking the whips on generally mediocre people to get the product out as quickly as
they can. "To heck with bugs. It's features that count."

So how's that for generalizing? <smile>

I really enjoy reading the WTF and other similar blogs for such stories. And then
there's comp.risks where mistakes have killed people.

Tony

--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
read the entire thread of messages.
Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at
http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm
Tony's Microsoft Access Blog - http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/

#24

eric.bouchardlefebvre (AT) gmail (DOT) com wrote:

Quote:

What is wrong with modern DB design approaches? And what's the point
of using a big relational DB without the benefits of integrity and
normalization?

Probably because the talented people at the software vendors are the sales droids.
The system was originally designed by someone who didn't have a clue and they managed
to sell a few copies and kept on going. Any competent database or developers or
systems analyst types likely didn't stay very long either. And management is
cracking the whips on generally mediocre people to get the product out as quickly as
they can. "To heck with bugs. It's features that count."

So how's that for generalizing? <smile>

I really enjoy reading the WTF and other similar blogs for such stories. And then
there's comp.risks where mistakes have killed people.

Tony

--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
read the entire thread of messages.
Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at
http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm
Tony's Microsoft Access Blog - http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/

#25

eric.bouchardlefebvre (AT) gmail (DOT) com wrote:

Quote:

What is wrong with modern DB design approaches? And what's the point
of using a big relational DB without the benefits of integrity and
normalization?

Probably because the talented people at the software vendors are the sales droids.
The system was originally designed by someone who didn't have a clue and they managed
to sell a few copies and kept on going. Any competent database or developers or
systems analyst types likely didn't stay very long either. And management is
cracking the whips on generally mediocre people to get the product out as quickly as
they can. "To heck with bugs. It's features that count."

So how's that for generalizing? <smile>

I really enjoy reading the WTF and other similar blogs for such stories. And then
there's comp.risks where mistakes have killed people.

Tony

--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
read the entire thread of messages.
Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at
http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm
Tony's Microsoft Access Blog - http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/

#26

eric.bouchardlefebvre (AT) gmail (DOT) com wrote:

Quote:

What is wrong with modern DB design approaches? And what's the point
of using a big relational DB without the benefits of integrity and
normalization?

Probably because the talented people at the software vendors are the sales droids.
The system was originally designed by someone who didn't have a clue and they managed
to sell a few copies and kept on going. Any competent database or developers or
systems analyst types likely didn't stay very long either. And management is
cracking the whips on generally mediocre people to get the product out as quickly as
they can. "To heck with bugs. It's features that count."

So how's that for generalizing? <smile>

I really enjoy reading the WTF and other similar blogs for such stories. And then
there's comp.risks where mistakes have killed people.

Tony

--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
read the entire thread of messages.
Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at
http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm
Tony's Microsoft Access Blog - http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/

#27

eric.bouchardlefebvre (AT) gmail (DOT) com wrote:

Quote:

What is wrong with modern DB design approaches? And what's the point
of using a big relational DB without the benefits of integrity and
normalization?

Probably because the talented people at the software vendors are the sales droids.
The system was originally designed by someone who didn't have a clue and they managed
to sell a few copies and kept on going. Any competent database or developers or
systems analyst types likely didn't stay very long either. And management is
cracking the whips on generally mediocre people to get the product out as quickly as
they can. "To heck with bugs. It's features that count."

So how's that for generalizing? <smile>

I really enjoy reading the WTF and other similar blogs for such stories. And then
there's comp.risks where mistakes have killed people.

Tony

--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
read the entire thread of messages.
Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at
http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm
Tony's Microsoft Access Blog - http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/

#28

eric.bouchardlefebvre (AT) gmail (DOT) com wrote:

Quote:

What is wrong with modern DB design approaches? And what's the point
of using a big relational DB without the benefits of integrity and
normalization?

Probably because the talented people at the software vendors are the sales droids.
The system was originally designed by someone who didn't have a clue and they managed
to sell a few copies and kept on going. Any competent database or developers or
systems analyst types likely didn't stay very long either. And management is
cracking the whips on generally mediocre people to get the product out as quickly as
they can. "To heck with bugs. It's features that count."

So how's that for generalizing? <smile>

I really enjoy reading the WTF and other similar blogs for such stories. And then
there's comp.risks where mistakes have killed people.

Tony

--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
read the entire thread of messages.
Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at
http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm
Tony's Microsoft Access Blog - http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/

#29

Hello Tony,

On 6 oct, 04:43, "Tony Toews [MVP]" <tto... (AT) telusplanet (DOT) net> wrote:

Quote:

The system was originally designed by someone who didn't have a clue and they managed
to sell a few copies and kept on going. * Any competent database or developers or
systems analyst types likely didn't stay very long either.

I know cases like this, and also cases where the systems were
originally developed using DBase or Access and ported to a DBMS using
an automatic database importer without any redesign.

Regards

#30

Hello Tony,

On 6 oct, 04:43, "Tony Toews [MVP]" <tto... (AT) telusplanet (DOT) net> wrote:

Quote:

The system was originally designed by someone who didn't have a clue and they managed
to sell a few copies and kept on going. * Any competent database or developers or
systems analyst types likely didn't stay very long either.

I know cases like this, and also cases where the systems were
originally developed using DBase or Access and ported to a DBMS using
an automatic database importer without any redesign.

Regards