Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.databases > #36 > unrolled thread

Designing a structure for

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.java.databases

Contents

  Designing a structure for "David Segall" <david.segall@THRWHITE.remove-dii-this> - 2011-04-27 15:21 +0000
    Re: Designing a structure "Ed Prochak" <ed.prochak@THRWHITE.remove-dii-this> - 2011-04-27 15:21 +0000
      Re: Designing a structure "David Segall" <david.segall@THRWHITE.remove-dii-this> - 2011-04-27 15:21 +0000
        Re: Designing a structure "Martin Gregorie" <martin.gregorie@THRWHITE.remove-dii-this> - 2011-04-27 15:21 +0000
          Re: Designing a structure "David Segall" <david.segall@THRWHITE.remove-dii-this> - 2011-04-27 15:21 +0000
            Re: Designing a structure "Ed Prochak" <ed.prochak@THRWHITE.remove-dii-this> - 2011-04-27 15:21 +0000
            Re: Designing a structure "Arved Sandstrom" <arved.sandstrom@THRWHITE.remove-dii-this> - 2011-04-27 15:21 +0000
        Re: Designing a structure "Ed Prochak" <ed.prochak@THRWHITE.remove-dii-this> - 2011-04-27 15:21 +0000
          Re: Designing a structure "David Segall" <david.segall@THRWHITE.remove-dii-this> - 2011-04-27 15:21 +0000
            Re: Designing a structure "Lew" <lew@THRWHITE.remove-dii-this> - 2011-04-27 15:21 +0000
              Re: Designing a structure "David Segall" <david.segall@THRWHITE.remove-dii-this> - 2011-04-27 15:21 +0000
                Re: Designing a structure "David Cressey" <david.cressey@THRWHITE.remove-dii-this> - 2011-04-27 15:21 +0000
                  Re: Designing a structure "David Segall" <david.segall@THRWHITE.remove-dii-this> - 2011-04-27 15:21 +0000
                Re: Designing a structure "Lew" <lew@THRWHITE.remove-dii-this> - 2011-04-27 15:21 +0000
                  Re: Designing a structure "David Segall" <david.segall@THRWHITE.remove-dii-this> - 2011-04-27 15:21 +0000
                    Re: Designing a structure "Ed Prochak" <ed.prochak@THRWHITE.remove-dii-this> - 2011-04-27 15:21 +0000
                    Re: Designing a structure "Lew" <lew@THRWHITE.remove-dii-this> - 2011-04-27 15:21 +0000
                      Re: Designing a structure "David Segall" <david.segall@THRWHITE.remove-dii-this> - 2011-04-27 15:21 +0000
              Re: Designing a structure "Gene Wirchenko" <gene.wirchenko@THRWHITE.remove-dii-this> - 2011-04-27 15:21 +0000
            Re: Designing a structure "Roedy Green" <roedy.green@THRWHITE.remove-dii-this> - 2011-04-27 15:21 +0000
    Re: Designing a structure "ram" <ram@THRWHITE.remove-dii-this> - 2011-04-27 15:21 +0000
      Re: Designing a structure "Arved Sandstrom" <arved.sandstrom@THRWHITE.remove-dii-this> - 2011-04-27 15:21 +0000
        Re: Designing a structure "ram" <ram@THRWHITE.remove-dii-this> - 2011-04-27 15:21 +0000
          Re: Designing a structure "Arved Sandstrom" <arved.sandstrom@THRWHITE.remove-dii-this> - 2011-04-27 15:21 +0000
            Re: Designing a structure "Lew" <lew@THRWHITE.remove-dii-this> - 2011-04-27 15:21 +0000
        Re: Designing a structure "David Segall" <david.segall@THRWHITE.remove-dii-this> - 2011-04-27 15:21 +0000
          Re: Designing a structure "Marco" <marco@THRWHITE.remove-dii-this> - 2011-04-27 15:21 +0000
            Re: Designing a structure "Arved Sandstrom" <arved.sandstrom@THRWHITE.remove-dii-this> - 2011-04-27 15:21 +0000
    Re: Designing a structure "Marco" <marco@THRWHITE.remove-dii-this> - 2011-04-27 15:21 +0000

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#36 — Designing a structure for

  To: comp.databases,comp.lang.
I have decided to rewrite a couple of applications that use my
personal information database and I'm looking for ideas on how to
structure a new database for them.

For most purposes I want to communicate with a family or business at
its "home" address. For example, "Fred and Betty Bloggs" or "Acme
Widgets" have a specified street address and telephone number. It is
possible that the Bloggs family has a holiday house or I have to deal
with Acme Widgets at more than one location. I also need information
about individuals such as mobile phone numbers and birthdays but I
don't want to duplicate shared home and business addresses and
telephone numbers. For example, Betty Bloggs could work for Acme
Widgets and share a town house and a country house with Fred.

Please ignore any database structure implied in the preceding
paragraph. I'm looking for the ideal PIM database structure and you
probably understand the requirements better than I do. No doubt you
have been frustrated by the address books in many applications that
insist you supply all the details for every individual.

My excuse for posting in comp.lang.java.databases is that I follow it
and the applications will be written in Java and use Derby as the
database. I confess that the reason is to canvas a wider audience but
I refuse to admit the post is spam.

---
 * Synchronet * The Whitehouse BBS --- whitehouse.hulds.com --- check it out free usenet!
--- Synchronet 3.15a-Win32 NewsLink 1.92
Time Warp of the Future BBS - telnet://time.synchro.net:24

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#42 — Re: Designing a structure

  To: comp.databases,comp.lang.
On Apr 26, 9:33 am, David Segall <da...@address.invalid> wrote:
> I have decided to rewrite a couple of applications that use my
> personal information database and I'm looking for ideas on how to
> structure a new database for them.
>
> For most purposes I want to communicate with a family or business at
> its "home" address. For example, "Fred and Betty Bloggs" or "Acme
> Widgets" have a specified street address and telephone number. It is
> possible that the Bloggs family has a holiday house or I have to deal
> with Acme Widgets at more than one location. I also need information
> about individuals such as mobile phone numbers and birthdays but I
> don't want to duplicate shared home and business addresses and
> telephone numbers. For example, Betty Bloggs could work for Acme
> Widgets and share a town house and a country house with Fred.
>
> Please ignore any database structure implied in the preceding
> paragraph. I'm looking for the ideal PIM database structure and you
> probably understand the requirements better than I do.

Sorry, but my crystal ball has been broken for quite some time. Only
you know the requirements for your project. What I would suggest is
that you study database modeling for a bit before beginning to write
the program and database. Look up ERD - Entity Relationship Diagrams
Pick a couple sites that are university based and read the materials.

And always keep in mind that sometimes the same requirements may
result in different designs from different developers Some of the
differences will be merely style differences and others will be
functional differences in areas not detailed in the requirements. As
they often say in the PERL programmers group, there's more than one
way to do it.

Finally, to give you a hint, I would approach this by making
addresses  a separate entity, Then both person and business entities
can reference the address entity (e.g. allows a home business) I'll
let your discover the entity you'll need to allow multiple addresses.
(it is not hard.)


>    ...   No doubt you
> have been frustrated by the address books in many applications that
> insist you supply all the details for every individual.
>
> My excuse for posting in comp.lang.java.databases is that I follow it
> and the applications will be written in Java and use Derby as the
> database. I confess that the reason is to canvas a wider audience but
> I refuse to admit the post is spam.

ERD development is independent of the DBMS as long as the DBMS is
relational. Using JAVA you may fall into some of the Object Oriented
thinking that sometimes  corrupts the relational design. So think
about your DB design carefully.

HTH,
   Ed

---
 * Synchronet * The Whitehouse BBS --- whitehouse.hulds.com --- check it out free usenet!
--- Synchronet 3.15a-Win32 NewsLink 1.92
Time Warp of the Future BBS - telnet://time.synchro.net:24

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#43 — Re: Designing a structure

  To: comp.databases,comp.lang.
Ed Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Apr 26, 9:33 am, David Segall <da...@address.invalid> wrote:
>> I'm looking for the ideal PIM database structure and you
>> probably understand the requirements better than I do.
>
>Sorry, but my crystal ball has been broken for quite some time. Only
>you know the requirements for your project. 
>
>Finally, to give you a hint, I would approach this by making
>addresses  a separate entity, Then both person and business entities
>can reference the address entity (e.g. allows a home business) I'll
>let your discover the entity you'll need to allow multiple addresses.
>(it is not hard.)
Thank you for the hint. Your hint indicates that you don't need a
crystal ball to understand my requirements and that you may have some
useful advice. Why are you so reluctant to give it to me?

---
 * Synchronet * The Whitehouse BBS --- whitehouse.hulds.com --- check it out free usenet!
--- Synchronet 3.15a-Win32 NewsLink 1.92
Time Warp of the Future BBS - telnet://time.synchro.net:24

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#45 — Re: Designing a structure

  To: comp.databases,comp.lang.
On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 18:33:58 +0000, David Segall wrote:

> Thank you for the hint. Your hint indicates that you don't need a
> crystal ball to understand my requirements and that you may have some
> useful advice. Why are you so reluctant to give it to me?
>
Because he gave you the best possible advice already. To amplify what Ed
said:

Only you know how you need to relate addresses, phone numbers, etc, etc to
persons and businesses and whether to model relationships between people
and businesses. If you don't know this already, analyse the data you own
until you do understand it.

Then use that analysis to derive an entity-relationship diagram. Add
attributes to the entities. Decide which are keys. Eliminate derived
attributes. Normalise the result to 3rd normal form. Then and only
then, design and code your schema, adding in the indexes needed to support
prime keys and foreign key relationships.

For your reading pleasure: I don't know who the currently fashionable
database design gurus are, but finding and reading stuff by Chris Date,
especially "An Introduction to Database Systems" volume 1, would be a good
start.


-- 
martin@   | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | 
org       | Zappa fan & glider pilot

---
 * Synchronet * The Whitehouse BBS --- whitehouse.hulds.com --- check it out free usenet!
--- Synchronet 3.15a-Win32 NewsLink 1.92
Time Warp of the Future BBS - telnet://time.synchro.net:24

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#46 — Re: Designing a structure

  To: comp.databases,comp.lang.
Martin Gregorie <martin@see.sig.for.address> wrote:

>On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 18:33:58 +0000, David Segall wrote:
>
>> Thank you for the hint. Your hint indicates that you don't need a
>> crystal ball to understand my requirements and that you may have some
>> useful advice. Why are you so reluctant to give it to me?
>>
>Because he gave you the best possible advice already. To amplify what Ed
>said:
You and Ed have provided excellent answers to a question that I did
not ask.

I assumed that most people who read this group would use a computer to
store the type of personal information that I outlined in my second
paragraph. I hoped that they had used one of the unwieldy address
books that come with most popular PIMs and email clients and they had
thought about a better way of organizing the data.

Perhaps I provided too much information about the way I saw the
problem and its complications. I should just have asked how you would
model the data for _your_ personal information database.

---
 * Synchronet * The Whitehouse BBS --- whitehouse.hulds.com --- check it out free usenet!
--- Synchronet 3.15a-Win32 NewsLink 1.92
Time Warp of the Future BBS - telnet://time.synchro.net:24

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#48 — Re: Designing a structure

  To: comp.databases,comp.lang.
On Apr 29, 9:35 am, David Segall <da...@address.invalid> wrote:
> Martin Gregorie <mar...@see.sig.for.address> wrote:
> >On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 18:33:58 +0000, David Segall wrote:
>
> >> Thank you for the hint. Your hint indicates that you don't need a
> >> crystal ball to understand my requirements and that you may have some
> >> useful advice. Why are you so reluctant to give it to me?
>
> >Because he gave you the best possible advice already. To amplify what Ed
> >said:
>
> You and Ed have provided excellent answers to a question that I did
> not ask.
>
> I assumed that most people who read this group would use a computer to
> store the type of personal information that I outlined in my second
> paragraph. I hoped that they had used one of the unwieldy address
> books that come with most popular PIMs and email clients and they had
> thought about a better way of organizing the data.
>
> Perhaps I provided too much information about the way I saw the
> problem and its complications. I should just have asked how you would
> model the data for _your_ personal information database.

If you want to see how different people manage the trade offs, try
googling for open source projects.

I'm not trying to be mean, but I'm not working on a PIM (my PALM PDA
works just fine, thanks. The phone contacts list could use some
work!). I'm too busy with half a dozen other projects to get into a
long discussion about a PIM database. Maybe someone else can take up
the discussion.

Or start by showing what you would do. We can toss in suggestions. But
I honestly don't have the time to come up with a design of my own
right now.

Have a good day.
    Ed

---
 * Synchronet * The Whitehouse BBS --- whitehouse.hulds.com --- check it out free usenet!
--- Synchronet 3.15a-Win32 NewsLink 1.92
Time Warp of the Future BBS - telnet://time.synchro.net:24

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#49 — Re: Designing a structure

  To: comp.databases,comp.lang.
"David Segall" <david@address.invalid> wrote in message 
news:968e14tp32b0fn9qdfq38uorlk23oaa0s0@4ax.com...
> Martin Gregorie <martin@see.sig.for.address> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 18:33:58 +0000, David Segall wrote:
>>
>>> Thank you for the hint. Your hint indicates that you don't need a
>>> crystal ball to understand my requirements and that you may have some
>>> useful advice. Why are you so reluctant to give it to me?
>>>
>>Because he gave you the best possible advice already. To amplify what Ed
>>said:
> You and Ed have provided excellent answers to a question that I did
> not ask.
>
> I assumed that most people who read this group would use a computer to
> store the type of personal information that I outlined in my second
> paragraph. I hoped that they had used one of the unwieldy address
> books that come with most popular PIMs and email clients and they had
> thought about a better way of organizing the data.
>
> Perhaps I provided too much information about the way I saw the
> problem and its complications. I should just have asked how you would
> model the data for _your_ personal information database.

Even before modelling your data, do up use cases just as you might do for 
any other software project. In other words, think of all the different 
contact scenarios you have had or might have. For example:

a) contact Al at his house;
b) contact the Bloggs at their house;
c) contact Betty Bloggs at her work;
d) contact your insurance agent on his cell;
e) check to see if Bill is on vacation at his cottage and do you have the 
address for the cottage?
et cetera...

Consider also if you want your PIM to have interaction history. Namely, so 
you can enter information pertaining to, and answers questions about, all 
the people you dealt/deal with concerning a particular issue, or review 
particulars of the last contact you had with person X, or whatever. Again, 
this will generate more use cases.

Your use cases will enable you to test your data structure design.

AHS

---
 * Synchronet * The Whitehouse BBS --- whitehouse.hulds.com --- check it out free usenet!
--- Synchronet 3.15a-Win32 NewsLink 1.92
Time Warp of the Future BBS - telnet://time.synchro.net:24

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#47 — Re: Designing a structure

  To: comp.databases,comp.lang.
On Apr 28, 2:33 pm, David Segall <da...@address.invalid> wrote:
> Ed Prochak <edproc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Apr 26, 9:33 am, David Segall <da...@address.invalid> wrote:
> >> I'm looking for the ideal PIM database structure and you
> >> probably understand the requirements better than I do.
>
> >Sorry, but my crystal ball has been broken for quite some time. Only
> >you know the requirements for your project.
>
> >Finally, to give you a hint, I would approach this by making
> >addresses  a separate entity, Then both person and business entities
> >can reference the address entity (e.g. allows a home business) I'll
> >let your discover the entity you'll need to allow multiple addresses.
> >(it is not hard.)
>
> Thank you for the hint. Your hint indicates that you don't need a
> crystal ball to understand my requirements and that you may have some
> useful advice. Why are you so reluctant to give it to me?

There is no ONE TRUE CORRECT SOLUTION.

It is a matter of balancing features (performance, data storage, code
size, code functionality).

If you want a professional solution, then you need to learn
professional skills. It will take more time and effort than can be
done in a single newsgroup thread.

If you are just looking to develop a toy database for yourself, then
at least have a brief understanding of ERDs will help. In this case
you should happily play with the database an application code, adding
features here, deleting features there. As long as you are happy with
how it works in this case, my suggestions of normalizing tables and
structured code will be irrelevant.

Finally, we also get the occasional student postings here looking for
solutions to their homework/project assignments.  I try in my posts to
generally lead toward solutions without supplying them (unless the
person is asking something specific like why a certain SELECT
statement fails and gives enough context to make sense of it).

  Ed

---
 * Synchronet * The Whitehouse BBS --- whitehouse.hulds.com --- check it out free usenet!
--- Synchronet 3.15a-Win32 NewsLink 1.92
Time Warp of the Future BBS - telnet://time.synchro.net:24

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#52 — Re: Designing a structure

  To: comp.databases,comp.lang.
Ed Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Apr 28, 2:33 pm, David Segall <da...@address.invalid> wrote:
>> Ed Prochak <edproc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On Apr 26, 9:33 am, David Segall <da...@address.invalid> wrote:
>> >> I'm looking for the ideal PIM database structure and you
>> >> probably understand the requirements better than I do.
>>
>> >Sorry, but my crystal ball has been broken for quite some time. Only
>> >you know the requirements for your project.
>>
>> >Finally, to give you a hint, I would approach this by making
>> >addresses  a separate entity, Then both person and business entities
>> >can reference the address entity (e.g. allows a home business) I'll
>> >let your discover the entity you'll need to allow multiple addresses.
>> >(it is not hard.)
>>
>> Thank you for the hint. Your hint indicates that you don't need a
>> crystal ball to understand my requirements and that you may have some
>> useful advice. Why are you so reluctant to give it to me?
>
>There is no ONE TRUE CORRECT SOLUTION.
That is a surprising statement for a contributor to this group. It is
probably true, but the relational database has dominated the industry
for over 30 years. It provides an excellent way of modeling real world
data and the alternatives have not (yet) been seen as a serious
challenge.
>It is a matter of balancing features (performance, data storage, code
>size, code functionality).
The history of computing has been about finding the "true correct"
data model or user interface and _then_ optimising features including
the ones you list. It is possible that an address book is an extremely
complicated application and there is no simple model for it that
minimises redundant information. I sought your help because, unless
the model is simple enough to think of in a few idle minutes, it is
probably too complicated for the average address book user. I am
confident that if you can produce an intuitive, simple, data model it
will become as ubiquitous as a user name and password logon.
>
>If you want a professional solution, then you need to learn
>professional skills. It will take more time and effort than can be
>done in a single newsgroup thread.

>
>Finally, we also get the occasional student postings here looking for
>solutions to their homework/project assignments.  I try in my posts to
>generally lead toward solutions without supplying them 
I believed my original post indicated that I had thought about the
problem, looked at other people's solutions and that I was coming to
you because I was not satisfied with anything I had seen so far. I
assumed that the post spoke for itself and, even if it did not, a
respondent would do a Google search before making assumptions about
the poster. Clearly, my post was not as lucid as it seemed to me
because this is the fourth response based on an elementary database
design course. I was seeking a breakthrough data model of a personal
address book that one of you had thought of in the shower this
morning.

---
 * Synchronet * The Whitehouse BBS --- whitehouse.hulds.com --- check it out free usenet!
--- Synchronet 3.15a-Win32 NewsLink 1.92
Time Warp of the Future BBS - telnet://time.synchro.net:24

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#53 — Re: Designing a structure

  To: comp.databases,comp.lang.
David Segall wrote:
> The history of computing has been about finding the "true correct"
> data model or user interface and _then_ optimising features including
> the ones you list. 

That is completely false.  Studies and experience have consistently shown that 
there is more than one "correct" solution for almost every software 
requirement.  The history of computing has notably omitted attempts to find 
any "true correct" data model or user interface, and has focused instead on 
elucidating principles by which *a* correct solution can be found in any given 
situation.

> I believed my original post indicated that I had thought about the
> problem, looked at other people's solutions and that I was coming to
> you because I was not satisfied with anything I had seen so far. I
> assumed that the post spoke for itself and, even if it did not, a
> respondent would do a Google search before making assumptions about
> the poster. Clearly, my post was not as lucid as it seemed to me
> because this is the fourth response based on an elementary database
> design course. I was seeking a breakthrough data model of a personal
> address book that one of you had thought of in the shower this
> morning. 

In other words, you couldn't come up with the idea, and since Ed and others 
didn't, now it's their fault.

-- 
Lew

---
 * Synchronet * The Whitehouse BBS --- whitehouse.hulds.com --- check it out free usenet!
--- Synchronet 3.15a-Win32 NewsLink 1.92
Time Warp of the Future BBS - telnet://time.synchro.net:24

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#55 — Re: Designing a structure

  To: comp.databases,comp.lang.
Lew <lew@lewscanon.com> wrote:

>David Segall wrote:
>> The history of computing has been about finding the "true correct"
>> data model or user interface and _then_ optimising features including
>> the ones you list. 
>
>That is completely false.
>  Studies and experience have consistently shown that 
>there is more than one "correct" solution for almost every software 
>requirement.  The history of computing has notably omitted attempts to find 
>any "true correct" data model or user interface, and has focused instead on 
>elucidating principles by which *a* correct solution can be found in any given 
>situation.
I believe that the relational database, the spreadsheet, the Xerox
Alto user interface, the Java-style virtual machine, hypertext and the
world wide web are all examples of the "correct" model. Each of those
models was so intuitively right that they persisted despite the fact
that many of the early implementations were unacceptable. Of course,
those historical milestones do not contradict your second sentence.
>
>> I believed my original post indicated that I had thought about the
>> problem, looked at other people's solutions and that I was coming to
>> you because I was not satisfied with anything I had seen so far. I
>> assumed that the post spoke for itself and, even if it did not, a
>> respondent would do a Google search before making assumptions about
>> the poster. Clearly, my post was not as lucid as it seemed to me
>> because this is the fourth response based on an elementary database
>> design course. I was seeking a breakthrough data model of a personal
>> address book that one of you had thought of in the shower this
>> morning. 
>
>In other words, you couldn't come up with the idea, and since Ed and others 
>didn't, now it's their fault.
I apologise for the grumpy tone. I am frustrated that I can't come up
with a simple model for what seems like a simple application but I am
certainly not blaming anyone else.

---
 * Synchronet * The Whitehouse BBS --- whitehouse.hulds.com --- check it out free usenet!
--- Synchronet 3.15a-Win32 NewsLink 1.92
Time Warp of the Future BBS - telnet://time.synchro.net:24

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56 — Re: Designing a structure

  To: comp.databases,comp.lang.

"David Segall" <david@address.invalid> wrote in message
news:5gno14tv1ki40qfeoko806joq81c7atdti@4ax.com...
...
> I apologise for the grumpy tone. I am frustrated that I can't come up
> with a simple model for what seems like a simple application but I am
> certainly not blaming anyone else.

What makes you think that a simpler model is going to give you better
results than the model you already have?  I hope this question doesn't
offend you.  It's not meant to.  I thin if you provide the answer, it might
help redirect the thinking of those who are trying to help you.

I can't speak for others, but it's been ages since I thought about how PIM
data ought to be organized,  and I doubt that I would improve on your
current best solution with just a quick study.

---
 * Synchronet * The Whitehouse BBS --- whitehouse.hulds.com --- check it out free usenet!
--- Synchronet 3.15a-Win32 NewsLink 1.92
Time Warp of the Future BBS - telnet://time.synchro.net:24

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#58 — Re: Designing a structure

  To: comp.databases,comp.lang.
"David Cressey" <cressey73@verizon.net> wrote:

>
>"David Segall" <david@address.invalid> wrote in message
>news:5gno14tv1ki40qfeoko806joq81c7atdti@4ax.com...
>...
>> I apologise for the grumpy tone. I am frustrated that I can't come up
>> with a simple model for what seems like a simple application but I am
>> certainly not blaming anyone else.
>
>What makes you think that a simpler model is going to give you better
>results than the model you already have? 
My current address book would not pass any test for a relational
database. It consists of records that are tied to a particular street
address and they may contain information about several people. This
results in a mobile or work phone number field that contains more than
one phone number and some text to distinguish them. There are multiple
records for friends who have more than one address. It is not a model,
it's a shambles. 

The address books in applications like Outlook Express, Thunderbird
and a few PIMs I have looked at insist that all the information
accompanies every entry. The street address of a couple must be
entered for each of them and both must be changed when they move. None
of them cater for my sister who has a house in Australia, France and
the United States although she has only one email address. I am
willing to ignore the problem posed by my niece who's mobile phone
number changes when she leaves her home country!
>
>I can't speak for others, but it's been ages since I thought about how PIM
>data ought to be organized,  and I doubt that I would improve on your
>current best solution with just a quick study.
I can't help feeling that anybody's quick study would provide a better
model than either of those I have described above and could easily be
better than anything that I have thought of so far.

---
 * Synchronet * The Whitehouse BBS --- whitehouse.hulds.com --- check it out free usenet!
--- Synchronet 3.15a-Win32 NewsLink 1.92
Time Warp of the Future BBS - telnet://time.synchro.net:24

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#57 — Re: Designing a structure

  To: comp.databases,comp.lang.
Lew <lew@lewscanon.com> wrote:
>>  Studies and experience have consistently shown that 
>> there is more than one "correct" solution for almost every software 
>> requirement.  The history of computing has notably omitted attempts to find 
>> any "true correct" data model or user interface, and has focused instead on 
>> elucidating principles by which *a* correct solution can be found in any given 
>> situation.

David Segall wrote:
> I believe that the relational database,

Never yet implemented, not implemented in the same way by all vendors, and by 
no means the only database model in production use.

> the spreadsheet, 

of which many varieties exist, and remains to this day only one kind of 
document or analytical tool, competing with and usually giving way to 
presentation software and database systems.

> the Xerox [Palo] Alto user interface, 

Tweaked, altered and re-interpreted a zillion ways by a zillion vendors.  Open 
Look is not Mac is not Motif is not any of the dissimilar Windows interfaces. 
  A mouse is not a pen on a tablet is not a trackball is not a 
retinal-tracking device.  The WIMP interface is one of many, and not the only 
one in production use; command line remains strong and will never go away.

> the Java-style virtual machine, 

A subject of huge controversy, as evidenced by the vehement C++ vs. C#/Java 
religious wars.  Not a clear winner; certainly not the one "true, correct" 
execution model.

> models was so intuitively right that they persisted despite the fact

... that to this day many viable alternatives exist and remain competitive 
with these so called "true, correct" ways.

> that many of the early implementations were unacceptable. Of course,
> those historical milestones do not contradict your second sentence.

Nor the first.  Every single example you cited is one of several solutions to 
a given problem, e.g., issuing commands to the computer.  In each case, the 
alternative solutions are more viable for certain scenarios, and remain 
popular to this day.  Every single one is realized differently by different 
vendors.  None of them are likely to remain the best practice for the 
foreseeable future.  Each and every example you cited supports the thesis that 
there has yet to be found any one "true, correct" solution in software 
engineering.

-- 
Lew

---
 * Synchronet * The Whitehouse BBS --- whitehouse.hulds.com --- check it out free usenet!
--- Synchronet 3.15a-Win32 NewsLink 1.92
Time Warp of the Future BBS - telnet://time.synchro.net:24

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#73 — Re: Designing a structure

  To: comp.databases,comp.lang.
Lew <lew@lewscanon.com> wrote:

>Lew <lew@lewscanon.com> wrote:
>>>  Studies and experience have consistently shown that 
>>> there is more than one "correct" solution for almost every software 
>>> requirement.  The history of computing has notably omitted attempts to find 
>>> any "true correct" data model or user interface, and has focused instead on 
>>> elucidating principles by which *a* correct solution can be found in any given 
>>> situation.
>
>David Segall wrote:
>> I believe that the relational database,
>
>Never yet implemented, not implemented in the same way by all vendors, and by 
>no means the only database model in production use.
>
>> the spreadsheet, 
>
>of which many varieties exist, and remains to this day only one kind of 
>document or analytical tool, competing with and usually giving way to 
>presentation software and database systems.
>
>> the Xerox [Palo] Alto user interface, 
>
>Tweaked, altered and re-interpreted a zillion ways by a zillion vendors.  Open 
>Look is not Mac is not Motif is not any of the dissimilar Windows interfaces. 
>  A mouse is not a pen on a tablet is not a trackball is not a 
>retinal-tracking device.  The WIMP interface is one of many, and not the only 
>one in production use; command line remains strong and will never go away.
>
>> the Java-style virtual machine, 
>
>A subject of huge controversy, as evidenced by the vehement C++ vs. C#/Java 
>religious wars.  Not a clear winner; certainly not the one "true, correct" 
>execution model.
>
>> models was so intuitively right that they persisted despite the fact
>
>... that to this day many viable alternatives exist and remain competitive 
>with these so called "true, correct" ways.
>
>> that many of the early implementations were unacceptable. Of course,
>> those historical milestones do not contradict your second sentence.
>
>Nor the first.  Every single example you cited is one of several solutions to 
>a given problem, e.g., issuing commands to the computer.  In each case, the 
>alternative solutions are more viable for certain scenarios, and remain 
>popular to this day.  Every single one is realized differently by different 
>vendors.  None of them are likely to remain the best practice for the 
>foreseeable future.  Each and every example you cited supports the thesis that 
>there has yet to be found any one "true, correct" solution in software 
>engineering.
We seem to have an irreconcilable disagreement that is based on
different views of "true and correct". I think that chocolate cake is
an important concept that we all share. You argue that real chocolate
cake does not exist because nobody has produced a cake that is
entirely chocolate and/or that there are zillions of different recipes
for chocolate cake and/or that there are sound reasons for not eating
chocolate cake. I can't refute any of those arguments. My view is that
the chocolate cake model is "true and correct" because everyone who
reads the desert menu knows what chocolate cake should be and because
chocolate cake has become an important part of the menu.

It seems that you agree that we have a common understanding of a
"relational database" or the "Alto user interface" because you can
argue about them. I assume that you would also agree that both have
had a profound effect on the history of computing. Our disagreement is
therefore only whether those terms describe real, singular, intuitive
models. I think they do. I believe, based on Ed's first use of the
term, that I can use "true and correct" to describe that.

---
 * Synchronet * The Whitehouse BBS --- whitehouse.hulds.com --- check it out free usenet!
--- Synchronet 3.15a-Win32 NewsLink 1.92
Time Warp of the Future BBS - telnet://time.synchro.net:24

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#74 — Re: Designing a structure

  To: comp.databases,comp.lang.
On May 7, 11:53 am, David Segall <da...@address.invalid> wrote:
> Lew <l...@lewscanon.com> wrote:
> >Lew <l...@lewscanon.com> wrote:
> >>>  Studies and experience have consistently shown that
> >>> there is more than one "correct" solution for almost every software
> >>> requirement.  The history of computing has notably omitted attempts to find
> >>> any "true correct" data model or user interface, and has focused instead on
> >>> elucidating principles by which *a* correct solution can be found in any given
> >>> situation.
>
> >David Segall wrote:
> >> I believe that the relational database,
>
> >Never yet implemented, not implemented in the same way by all vendors, and by
> >no means the only database model in production use.
>
> >> the spreadsheet,
>
> >of which many varieties exist, and remains to this day only one kind of
> >document or analytical tool, competing with and usually giving way to
> >presentation software and database systems.
>
> >> the Xerox [Palo] Alto user interface,
>
> >Tweaked, altered and re-interpreted a zillion ways by a zillion vendors.  Open
> >Look is not Mac is not Motif is not any of the dissimilar Windows interfaces.
> >  A mouse is not a pen on a tablet is not a trackball is not a
> >retinal-tracking device.  The WIMP interface is one of many, and not the only
> >one in production use; command line remains strong and will never go away.
>
> >> the Java-style virtual machine,
>
> >A subject of huge controversy, as evidenced by the vehement C++ vs. C#/Java
> >religious wars.  Not a clear winner; certainly not the one "true, correct"
> >execution model.
>
> >> models was so intuitively right that they persisted despite the fact
>
> >... that to this day many viable alternatives exist and remain competitive
> >with these so called "true, correct" ways.
>
> >> that many of the early implementations were unacceptable. Of course,
> >> those historical milestones do not contradict your second sentence.
>
> >Nor the first.  Every single example you cited is one of several solutions to
> >a given problem, e.g., issuing commands to the computer.  In each case, the
> >alternative solutions are more viable for certain scenarios, and remain
> >popular to this day.  Every single one is realized differently by different
> >vendors.  None of them are likely to remain the best practice for the
> >foreseeable future.  Each and every example you cited supports the thesis that
> >there has yet to be found any one "true, correct" solution in software
> >engineering.
>
> We seem to have an irreconcilable disagreement that is based on
> different views of "true and correct". I think that chocolate cake is
> an important concept that we all share. You argue that real chocolate
> cake does not exist because nobody has produced a cake that is
> entirely chocolate and/or that there are zillions of different recipes
> for chocolate cake and/or that there are sound reasons for not eating
> chocolate cake. I can't refute any of those arguments. My view is that
> the chocolate cake model is "true and correct" because everyone who
> reads the desert menu knows what chocolate cake should be and because
> chocolate cake has become an important part of the menu.
>
> It seems that you agree that we have a common understanding of a
> "relational database" or the "Alto user interface" because you can
> argue about them. I assume that you would also agree that both have
> had a profound effect on the history of computing. Our disagreement is
> therefore only whether those terms describe real, singular, intuitive
> models. I think they do. I believe, based on Ed's first use of the
> term, that I can use "true and correct" to describe that.

Let's see. I used the term like this:
quote
There is no ONE TRUE CORRECT SOLUTION.

It is a matter of balancing features (performance, data storage, code
size, code functionality).
quote/

I think I would agree with Lew that the phrase "true and correct" is
an abstraction that does not exists in real-world products, including
software products. Precisely because there is that multidimensional
trade off, you only ever get to a local maximum because there is no
optimal solution for all cases. A product may be a significant
advancement in software development and still be nowhere near a "true
and correct" solution.

There is no one solution. So before you consider designing the DB, you
have to examine your requirements.  And your requirements will differ
from someone else's requirements so that your final solution becomes
useless to them.

So ignore the goal of a perfect product. If you are designing a PIM,
just follow some reasonable development process and get it done. Maybe
when you finish you will realize you could have done it better. Good,
that means you are learning. But if you seek the perfect PIM at the
start, you will never complete it. The perfect, true, and correct PIM
cannot exist. (and in the general case, you can replace PIM with about
any non-trivial software product in that sentence.)

  Ed

---
 * Synchronet * The Whitehouse BBS --- whitehouse.hulds.com --- check it out free usenet!
--- Synchronet 3.15a-Win32 NewsLink 1.92
Time Warp of the Future BBS - telnet://time.synchro.net:24

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#75 — Re: Designing a structure

  To: comp.databases,comp.lang.
David Segall wrote:
> We seem to have an irreconcilable disagreement that is based on
> different views of "true and correct". I think that chocolate cake is
> an important concept that we all share. You argue that real chocolate
> cake does not exist because nobody has produced a cake that is
> entirely chocolate and/or that there are zillions of different recipes
> for chocolate cake and/or that there are sound reasons for not eating
> chocolate cake. I can't refute any of those arguments. My view is that

Straw man.  That is not my argument; you have misstated my points irrevocably.

> the chocolate cake model is "true and correct" because everyone who
> reads the desert menu knows what chocolate cake should be and because
> chocolate cake has become an important part of the menu.

You can eat two different chocolate cakes and feel that they don't even 
deserve the same name, they're so different.  One can be white, the other 
brown.  One can have icing, the other not.  One can be very sweet and moist, 
the other rather dry and not so sweet.  one can be made with tons of sugar, 
the other without any sugar at all.  One might not even have chocolate in it, 
being made with carob and still billed as "chocolate" cake.  I know, I've had 
them.

Once again, you cite an example that proves my point, despite your complete 
misstatement of my point.

> It seems that you agree that we have a common understanding of a
> "relational database" or the "Alto user interface" [sic] because you can

that's the *Palo* Alto user interface.  That's not even the name of the 
interface; it's simply where it was developed, at the *Palo* Alto Research 
Center in *Palo* Alto.  I don't know how you came to think of that as the name 
for the interface principles.  They were developed in Palo Alto, not "Alto". 
"Palo" is part of the name.  Omitting the "Palo" is incorrect.  The name of 
the city is "Palo Alto".  Do not forget the "Palo".  Palo Alto.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palo_Alto>

> argue about them. I assume that you would also agree that both have
> had a profound effect on the history of computing. Our disagreement is
> therefore only whether those terms describe real, singular, intuitive
> models. I think they do. 

You are wrong.

-- 
Lew

---
 * Synchronet * The Whitehouse BBS --- whitehouse.hulds.com --- check it out free usenet!
--- Synchronet 3.15a-Win32 NewsLink 1.92
Time Warp of the Future BBS - telnet://time.synchro.net:24

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#81 — Re: Designing a structure

  To: comp.databases,comp.lang.
Lew <lew@lewscanon.com> wrote:

>David Segall wrote:
>> We seem to have an irreconcilable disagreement that is based on
>> different views of "true and correct". I think that chocolate cake is
>> an important concept that we all share. You argue that real chocolate
>> cake does not exist because nobody has produced a cake that is
>> entirely chocolate and/or that there are zillions of different recipes
>> for chocolate cake and/or that there are sound reasons for not eating
>> chocolate cake. I can't refute any of those arguments. My view is that
>
>Straw man.  That is not my argument; you have misstated my points irrevocably.
>
>> the chocolate cake model is "true and correct" because everyone who
>> reads the desert menu knows what chocolate cake should be and because
>> chocolate cake has become an important part of the menu.
>
>You can eat two different chocolate cakes and feel that they don't even 
>deserve the same name, they're so different.  One can be white, the other 
>brown.  One can have icing, the other not.  One can be very sweet and moist, 
>the other rather dry and not so sweet.  one can be made with tons of sugar, 
>the other without any sugar at all.  One might not even have chocolate in it, 
>being made with carob and still billed as "chocolate" cake.  I know, I've had 
>them.
We can never agree on this one. You see only the differences in the
model, I see only the commonality. The fact that you _can_ argue about
what makes a chocolate cake or a relational database makes me think
that both have a "truth" that exists outside any implementation.
>
>Once again, you cite an example that proves my point, despite your complete 
>misstatement of my point.
>
>> It seems that you agree that we have a common understanding of a
>> "relational database" or the "Alto user interface" [sic] because you can
>
>that's the *Palo* Alto user interface.  That's not even the name of the 
>interface; it's simply where it was developed, at the *Palo* Alto Research 
>Center in *Palo* Alto.  I don't know how you came to think of that as the name 
>for the interface principles.  They were developed in Palo Alto, not "Alto". 
>"Palo" is part of the name.  Omitting the "Palo" is incorrect.  The name of 
>the city is "Palo Alto".  Do not forget the "Palo".  Palo Alto.
><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palo_Alto>
The interface was named after the Alto computer
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xerox_Alto> on which it was first
demonstrated. It was Xerox, not me, who chose to omit "Palo" from the
name. I prefer the term "Alto user interface" because it acknowledges
the origin but I agree that "graphical user interface" is much more
common and I will adopt it in future posts to avoid worrying the
reader.

---
 * Synchronet * The Whitehouse BBS --- whitehouse.hulds.com --- check it out free usenet!
--- Synchronet 3.15a-Win32 NewsLink 1.92
Time Warp of the Future BBS - telnet://time.synchro.net:24

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#60 — Re: Designing a structure

  To: comp.databases,comp.lang.
Lew <lew@lewscanon.com> wrote:

>David Segall wrote:

[snip]

>> I believed my original post indicated that I had thought about the
>> problem, looked at other people's solutions and that I was coming to
>> you because I was not satisfied with anything I had seen so far. I
>> assumed that the post spoke for itself and, even if it did not, a
>> respondent would do a Google search before making assumptions about
>> the poster. Clearly, my post was not as lucid as it seemed to me
>> because this is the fourth response based on an elementary database
>> design course. I was seeking a breakthrough data model of a personal
>> address book that one of you had thought of in the shower this
>> morning. 
>
>In other words, you couldn't come up with the idea, and since Ed and others 
>didn't, now it's their fault.

     Cue the balloon joke.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

Computerese Irregular Verb Conjugation:
     I have preferences.
     You have biases.
     He/She has prejudices.

---
 * Synchronet * The Whitehouse BBS --- whitehouse.hulds.com --- check it out free usenet!
--- Synchronet 3.15a-Win32 NewsLink 1.92
Time Warp of the Future BBS - telnet://time.synchro.net:24

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#79 — Re: Designing a structure

  To: comp.databases,comp.lang.
On Fri, 02 May 2008 15:06:55 GMT, David Segall <david@address.invalid>
wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :

> It provides an excellent way of modeling real world
>data and the alternatives have not (yet) been seen as a serious
>challenge.

There  is the POD where you have complex connections.  Basically it
lets you solve the problem as though you infinte RAM in a non-stop
computer.

see http://mindprod.com/jgloss/pod.html

You give up the ad hoc-queries.
-- 

Roedy Green Canadian Mind Products
The Java Glossary
http://mindprod.com

---
 * Synchronet * The Whitehouse BBS --- whitehouse.hulds.com --- check it out free usenet!
--- Synchronet 3.15a-Win32 NewsLink 1.92
Time Warp of the Future BBS - telnet://time.synchro.net:24

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.java.databases

csiph-web