1. Quote of the Week
Karen Lopez: To bring others up to speed, Fabian is using an academic taxonomy for data modeling terms. It's valid. It's popular in research. It's not used in any major data modeling tool, nor in many practitioner resources. I have been using the industry vernaculars in my posts and here. Part of the debate that Fabian is having is because he does not tolerate the industry terms, so he chooses to attack others who use the mainstream terms. He believes they are "wrong" instead of "alternative". So that's part of the pain we have in debating his positions. I'm bilingual, but I choose to use just one set in my writings.
Fabian Pascal: Karen, bollocks. See, I can use non-academic terms too.
When, years ago in an online exchange, I argued that working with SQL DBMS's without knowledge and understanding of data and relational fundamentals is a costly proposition, an Oracle practitioner replied that "they train doctors on how to use medical devices, not teach them the theories behind them". I asked him what do doctors learn in their six years of medical school, but got no reply.
I have documented and debunked for decades the substitution of tool training for education and the ensuing "cookbook approach" to database practice it produces. While I have become more jaded, it is still difficult to run so frequently across something like
1. Quote of the Week
NULL values can be very useful, especially on indexes, as an indication of "index is not set" or "no index here", or "default inherited index applies".
I use Null values extensively (in huge database systems) with not only no problems whatsoever, but measurably signifcant advantages. People who try to tell you that "Nulls are the work of the devil", or :the sky will fall down if you allow nulls", or some such unsubstantiated childish delusion are exclusively ignorant of the correct ways to handle them. (Or too lazy/ineducable to learn their correct implementation and/or benefits.)
Fact, just plain indisputable fact. --bytes.com
