Data Normalization-Internet <> Data Normalization-Desktop
Tony McGuire
If anyone is working with Paradox and the Internet (and we should ALL at
least be considering this if we want to keep working), there is a new thread
beginning in the coreldevelopers.paradox-web group regarding Data
Normalization on the Internet and why it differs from traditional Data
Normalization.
This is a new arena and it would be nice to get a LOT of people thinking on
this.
Tony
Hanno van Pelt
a. About "Normalization" : Exactly 10 years ago I was told and taught why
'normalization' doesn't exists anymore. The person who taught me was a database
specialist in the Netherlands and he learned me about "grouping of dependencies"
and how the final result matches 3rd, 4th or sometime the 5th grade.
b. Web applications don't like traffic and as a result we rather work with flat
tables, is my understanding reading some of the threads on the other newsgroups.
This is NOT new to me since the same applies for datawarehousing approaches in
which data will need to be reviewed quickly by management (I am not talking
about OLAP solutions here). I have the feeling your applications are about
sharing information rather than inputting/modifying information. If this is
really the case, let me tell you that your approach is valid, since for data
sharing it is correct to make 'performance' to be one of your design parameters.
c. If this is not the case, I agree with Dennis that in the long run
"denormalization" just because of performance gains are not "recommendable",
unless the "denormalization" is controlled, in the sense that information is put
into a "normalized" structured by a routine that runs every minute/hour/day.
d. In the 60's databases were truncated for performances and capacity issues as
well, I was taught. Lets keep in mind that the internet is basically in the 60's
from its point of development. I always tell people that I feel lucky not to
have any DOS or paradox for DOS experience, which I still believe gives me some
advantages in some design/development situations. The current web development
concepts give me the feeling we are going back to the past (HTML is cumbersome,
TAGS are limited) and I rather 'jump on the train' when it really starts to to
become relevant for the solutions I am working on which require a lot of
interactive usage.
e. On a personal note : Although I like Paradox and I am honestly ready to
switch anytime to Paradox-i when it becomes a "robust" product, I keep on using
Coldfusion (4.5 for NT or Linux) with SQL 7 sp2 for some my web solutions (data
sharing and entry/modification/review of warehouse/procurement requisitions),
using SQL-DTS to exchange data with my Paradox/BDE system when required. Last
year I requested a DTS-like tool to be included into Paradox 10 in order to make
paradox/OPAL the 'master of my transmission between databases. This tool
would/could bring Paradox into any web arena but I feel/think this opinion is
not shared by the Canadian Paradox developers (?). If someone believes I
should/could switch to paradox-i, I will certainly try to follow his advice or
directions. Last year I worked a bit with the Paradox-web product as included in
the PDE but I found it too slow for me and considered it as work in progress.
On a last note :
Tony you mentioned "and we should ALL at least be considering this if we want to
keep working". Although I understand why you make this remark, I personnally
don't see your point about losing our jobs by sticking to the current approach
of "grouping of dependencies". My experience sofar is that the web makes people
look clever but in fact they run into troubles and come back to "us" asking
what they did wrong. I have the feeling that more and more people are
technology driven and forget about the 'art' behind it and run into the same
problems as 20 years ago. (Luckily I am not that old that I clearly remember the
situation 20 ago, but my previous bosses told me so).
Tony McGuire
Hanno van Pelt <hvan...@un.guate.net> wrote in message
news:3A2B02D9...@un.guate.net...
> On a last note :
>
> Tony you mentioned "and we should ALL at least be considering this if we
want to
> keep working". Although I understand why you make this remark, I
personnally
> don't see your point about losing our jobs by sticking to the current
approach
> of "grouping of dependencies". My experience sofar is that the web makes
people
> look clever but in fact they run into troubles and come back to "us"
asking
> what they did wrong. I have the feeling that more and more people are
> technology driven and forget about the 'art' behind it and run into the
same
> problems as 20 years ago. (Luckily I am not that old that I clearly
remember the
> situation 20 ago, but my previous bosses told me so).
>
Hanno,
The Internet is a fact of (business) life. Sooner or later your boss will
almost certainly want to place the company on the Internet, or at least on
an Intranet.
It is a way of generating new interest in the company, and to increase
sales.
It is also a way to share data between employees.
It accomplishes this with less resources than traditional means
It makes anywhere/anytime access to company data a reality
It makes your life as a developer much easier, since there is only one
copy of the application and one copy of the data to maintain
If you aren't ready to place your company on the Internet when the time
comes, the company will look elsewhere to have this done. I recommend that
everyone start exploring this now. And to be the one that suggests putting
the company on the Internet. Lead or be lead - or left in the dust.
And few businesses sell art, they sell the company product.
Tony