Re: gEDA-user: Fwd: Parts DB API: the story so far

[Peter Clifton <pcjc2@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 2007-12-20 at 08:24 -0800, Steve Meier wrote:

> The point of the rdb engine over flat files is avoid writting a lot of
> code to handle the flat files. Code that would be a lot of work and in
> the end would likely be a rdb engine (in my opnion). Why not just use an
> rdb to start with?

I'm going to quote a friend of mine, Julian Todd (who writes CAM
algorithms for a living). He is blogging about a hypothetical database
for holding records of Freedom of Information act requests on
mysociety.org

http://www.freesteel.co.uk/wpblog/2007/11/templateemail_document/

Julian likes flat files.

"""
Unfortunately, the design of the database is non-obvious, and no matter
how well you try to set it up, there will always be missing cases.
Possibly very important ones.

In the real world, difficult software is a process, not a finished
product. It’s no good hoping for it to be great when it is complete,
because it won’t ever be complete, therefore a design which allows the
system to perform at various stages of incompleteness is going to be
necessary if you are to avoid disappointment.

Now, it would be true to say that my theories of software design go
against the prevailing practice. To me, databases exist only to make
software run quicker, and generally provide a hindrance to the design
and experimentation process. If premature optimization is the root of
all evil, then databases are the devil’s post-it notes.
"""

I especially like the second paragraph.

-- 
Peter Clifton

Electrical Engineering Division,
Engineering Department,
University of Cambridge,
9, JJ Thomson Avenue,
Cambridge
CB3 0FA

Tel: +44 (0)7729 980173 - (No signal in the lab!)



_______________________________________________
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user