2 ms·
The up side is, you can easily create elegant conventions for this. The payoff is less friction between you and your features.
by ericingram 15y ago
The up side is, you can easily create elegant conventions for this. The payoff is less friction between you and your features.
- zzzeek 15y agoUsing conventions for data constraints is quite dangerous. Whereas bugs in software can be corrected, bugs in corrupt data often cannot, as the data is created in a temporally-dependent way (i.e. you captured it wrong) as well as that it may be massive (i.e. your corruption is widespread across TBs of data). Basically, you might only get one chance with data. A convention-based approach, or even a well thought out data-enforcement approach, will have bugs and failures, and you just have to hope these failures aren't severe enough that you lose your "one" chance. Relational constraints OTOH when used in their usual way make it virtually impossible to have situations like this.
- ericingram 15y agoI couldn't disagree more, but we obviously have different experiences.