Timeline for answer to Relational databases and iterative development by theMayer
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
Post Revisions
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 4, 2016 at 19:13 | comment | added | Jan Hudec | There is no discrepancy between relational model and it does usually map to real world just as well as any other kind of model. Some operations will be easier with one kind and other with other kind. The trouble is when you create a model of one kind (object-oriented) and try to implement it with tools of another kind (relational). That does not work well. But real world is not object-oriented. It just is and you model it. And have to use the right tools for the selected kind of model. | |
| Feb 29, 2016 at 17:12 | comment | added | theMayer | I see that relational databases are often used as the "universal hammer" to solve data storage needs - when in fact there are very specific reasons to use them. In a carefully-contemplated system, one rarely has to worry about the issues I wrote about in my answer - I'm addressing at a more general audience who may not have have the experience to arrive at an appropriate system design up-front. | |
| Feb 26, 2016 at 14:12 | comment | added | Alexey Zimarev | I would say more often it is just one field. Dramatic schema changes aren't that often. I am not a fan of using RDBMSes with OO design due to impedance mismatch. However, adding new types (tables) and properties (columns) are relatively easy in both worlds although in NoSQL it is indeed a bit easier. But complex changes are pain in both cases. Even worse it becomes in event-sourced system with snapshots, in opposite how pleasurable the development experience for such system is. | |
| Feb 26, 2016 at 13:44 | comment | added | theMayer | Yes, but it's never just one field ... | |
| Feb 26, 2016 at 13:18 | comment | added | Alexey Zimarev | I really hope you oversized a problem of creating a new field in RDBMS table to make the statement more dramatic. The database table needs to be very special (or the new field type needs to be something exceptional) to really create a problem to add one field. | |
| Feb 22, 2016 at 17:50 | history | answered | theMayer | CC BY-SA 3.0 |