Re: Little design mistakes that can be easily avoided (2): Listenning to CELKO (and CELKO alikes)

On May 26, 6:23 pm, Bob Badour <bbad...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Bruce C. Baker wrote:
"Bob Badour" <bbad...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:4658bf81$0$4043$9a566e8b@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Matthias Klaey wrote:

Bob Badour <bbad...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Matthias Klaey wrote:

Cimode <cim...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi,

Chapter 2 of the little things that can be done at little cost to
avoid misconceptions about RM design.

Lately, I opened a thread that gave opportunity for CELKO to post the
exact essence of what should *not* be done in design: let
subjectiveness regulate design instead of logic. I take the
opportunity of his thread to point out how and why it is wiser to
ignore such ideas to build better databases. For that I will take all
the posted comments and try to make sense out of them.

Regard...

[...]

Hmm. Is this just the usual Celko-bashing in this newsgroup? Did you
intend to write a parody on how to misread and misinterpert other
peoples texts? You don't mean this seriously, do you?

Celko is an idiot who need debunking everywhere. You seem to object to
debunking idiots.

"Celko is an idiot who need debunking everywhere": This is *your
opinion* about Celko. I happen to disagree with you (end of *this*
discussion from my part).

That Celko is an idiot is a factual matter and not opinion at all.

For those of us who are coming a little late to the "Celko is an idiot"
thread, could you give a few details about the dimensions of his idiocy?
TIA.

groups.google.com

Of course, this is the same place you'll discover that Bob Badour's
contributions amount to little more than to pile *** on heretics who
deviate from his narrow brand of orthodoxy. The reason it takes him so
long to debunk a lot of what people write on these subjects is that
his debunking chiefly amounts to finding relatively narrow
distinctions between his world view and theirs and using these
distinctions to justify him labeling almost everyone else 'idiots'.

You'll also find he's not very consistent. He'll routinely mix terms
of art relating to physical data management and logical issues, and
he's really rather ignorant of the actual state of play with modern
DBMS engines.

My (uninformed) diagnosis is that's all his career he's been an abused
and neglected DBA type. Probably with some justification--I think we
all share the belief that the relational model and data management
gets pretty short shrift--he's annoyed by this. I'm pretty
sympathetic, and I don't disagree with everything he says.

.

Quantcast