If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#221
|
|||
|
|||
Separate PK in Jxn Tbl?
On Jan 31, 4:59 pm, "Brian Selzer" wrote:
Constraints should always be checked by the DBMS, not by applications. If you have two separate applications that manipulate the same table, and one enforces one constraint while another enforces another, then all you need to do to bypass one constraint is to use the other application! What, then, is the point of even having the constraint? I think that application constraints and database constraints are really two entirely separate things. The fact that they may be structurally identical obscures and confuses this point. (Hence Brian's entirely reasonable rhetorical question above.) What, indeed, is the point of having one application and not another enforce a constraint, *if we view this from the perspective of the requirements of the database* Clearly there is none. However individual applications may have requirements that are best implemented as constraints *within the application.* I call these "application constraints" because they are specific to the application. They are *not* integrity constraints, even if we are using identical mechanisms (in different locations) for both. Marshall |
#222
|
|||
|
|||
Separate PK in Jxn Tbl?
Marshall wrote:
On Jan 31, 4:59 pm, "Brian Selzer" wrote: Constraints should always be checked by the DBMS, not by applications. If you have two separate applications that manipulate the same table, and one enforces one constraint while another enforces another, then all you need to do to bypass one constraint is to use the other application! What, then, is the point of even having the constraint? I think that application constraints and database constraints are really two entirely separate things. The fact that they may be structurally identical obscures and confuses this point. (Hence Brian's entirely reasonable rhetorical question above.) What, indeed, is the point of having one application and not another enforce a constraint, *if we view this from the perspective of the requirements of the database* Clearly there is none. However individual applications may have requirements that are best implemented as constraints *within the application.* I call these "application constraints" because they are specific to the application. They are *not* integrity constraints, even if we are using identical mechanisms (in different locations) for both. Marshall I think you're on to something. Making a distinction between database constraints and application constraints helps me clarify my thinking. Being able to "reflect" database constraints to keep applications in synch with changes sounds like a great idea. James A. Fortune |
#223
|
|||
|
|||
Separate PK in Jxn Tbl?
"Frank Hamersley" wrote in message
... Keith Wilby wrote: "Frank Hamersley" wrote in message ... provision of a menu option to reattach a data .mdb! Is it just me or is that complete gibberish? Reattach? Just you mate (at least I hope so or we are doomed). Pray tell how do you distribute new versions of "code"? Never had that concern? - always just hacked the live .mdb? Gawd. No, you have a development copy of the front end, there's no "reattaching" of code, you just make a new version of the front end available - front end: code and all other objects except the tables. Gawd, gibberish indeed. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|