3 ms·
I've been solving a lot of codebase pattern/anti-pattern nonsense by pushing all of the types, properties and relationships into SQL. It took me about a decade
by bob1029 3y ago
I've been solving a lot of codebase pattern/anti-pattern nonsense by pushing all of the types, properties and relationships into SQL. It took me about a decade to get to the point where I was done trying to be more clever than 40+ years of computer science aggregated into one magical box. A well-designed schema & clean SQL is an ego killer. It is so goddamned boring. Who would want to work on something that easy? Where did all the code go!?
I'd argue database-centric design is the only rational place to start if there is money on the table. Done correctly, this forces you to have deep & meaningful conversations with business stakeholders and customers. It was arguably the only way to build this stuff until the resume stat padders wandered into the job market and started throwing nu-SQL & "patterns" at everything that moved, or otherwise drew everyone's attention away from what is effectively a perfect solution for 99.99% of business needs.
- fellowniusmonk 3y agoCompletely agree, show me the data and I'll tell you if your solution matches the problem you are trying to solve. So much impedance is unclear thinking and overly complex solutions, it usually combines with inconsistent naming schemes across the stack. It's easier to gatekeep if you're the only who knows a "game" equals a "contestQuest" because you've created some overloaded polymorphic "quest" system in your backend.