Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Someone Else I Wouldn't Hire 2 Comments More | Login | Reply /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • You're right that this point is view is very worrying. It seems that "databases" is becoming one of those things that people expect to be easy to master because "you use them to built web sites - and all web stuff is easy, right?" So there large numbers of people out there building databases who have never heard of Ted Codd, the relational model or even normalisation. Last year I wrote about a particularly bad example [perl.org] I was cleaning up.

    I found a lot of flaky database knowledge in the Ruby on Rails book. It seems to me that people like David Heinemeier Hansson don't know as much about database theory as they like to think they do. A lot of what they are saying won't scale well to a "real" (i.e. of real-world complexity) database system.

    I should write up this stuff in more detail.
    • In fairness, from what I can see, they're not trying to scale like that. Rails seems to be mostly concerned about the low end simplistic kind of stuff. You're going to run in to the limits of Active Record PDQ if you've a complex database you're trying to plug into. But that's exactly the same as Class::DBI. You've got to be aware of the tools you're using and what their limitations are.

      -Dom

Stories, comments, journals, and other submissions on use Perl; are Copyright 1998-2006, their respective owners.