• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: Expanding Import
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Expanding Import


  • Subject: Re: Expanding Import
  • From: "Jerry W. Walker" <email@hidden>
  • Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 22:22:25 -0500

Hi, Scott,

On Mar 7, 2006, at 8:16 PM, Scott Winn wrote:

Thanks much to everyone for the help. Let me know if anyone hears a good rule of thumb for what does and does not need a relationship.

I think the primary rule of thumb is never add bi-directional relationships to reference data, e.g. names of states, names of months, etc. (well, hardly ever and you better have a darn good reason if you do).


If there is a primary rule of thumb, that's it. But it gets a bit more complicated than that.

Chuck suggested: "In a nutshell, avoid relationships from lookup objects to transactional objects."

In my experience, however, I've seen two approaches to all but the primary rule of thumb above.

One says put all the relationships in your model as bi-directional and prune them only if (and when) they cause problems. This approach tends to make your initial coding easier because you can simply assume, for any but a relationship to reference data, that the relationship is bi-directional and use it as such (in the WO way :-) ) without thinking about it a lot. When you find a problem, as you have, determine the offending relationship and prune it. This approach tends to be followed by the "Make it work, make it right, make it fast" school of developers.

The other (followed by strong XP advocates) says to only add relationships, and only in the direction required, that are needed to complete the immediate requirement. Never add anything (relationship, attribute, method, class and so forth) for some ill defined future need. In XP terms, only add what's needed to implement the current story and nothing more.

I've used both approaches and found them about the same in result unless you know you're working on a high volume, heavy traffic site (like the iTunes Music Store...), then you generally have to be aware of the inefficiencies of every WO trick you use.

HTH.

Regards,
Jerry

--
__ Jerry W. Walker,
WebObjects Developer/Instructor for High Performance Industrial Strength Internet Enabled Systems


    email@hidden
    203 278-4085        office



_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list      (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden


  • Follow-Ups:
    • Re: Expanding Import
      • From: Arturo Perez <email@hidden>
References: 
 >Expanding Import (From: Scott Winn <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Expanding Import (From: Chuck Hill <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Expanding Import (From: Scott Winn <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Expanding Import (From: Chuck Hill <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Expanding Import (From: Scott Winn <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Expanding Import (From: Chuck Hill <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Expanding Import (From: Scott Winn <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: Hiding session id in the URL
  • Next by Date: Re: WWDC 2006 -- August 7-11, San Francisco
  • Previous by thread: Re: Expanding Import
  • Next by thread: Re: Expanding Import
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread