October 15, 2009 at 2:06 pm
Luke L (10/15/2009)
Jack Corbett (10/15/2009)
Not big. We are talking, biggest non-audit table is less than 30K rows with maybe few hundred to a thousand added a year.My biggest issue is that one project is moving very slowly and the other project is much simpler and could be completed earlier. Providing users with a system where there is not a system at this point.
With this information, I'd suggest separate databases. That will allow you to separate your dev/test/prod instances/databases to allow development at different rates. Also, what happens when the devs from one group change something int he common data that breaks the other app? Seems like that might be more likely to happen than not.
What happens if the slow moving project dies? Then you waited on them for nothing.
I'd say get em something that works, and then if the slow moving project finally comes online, deal with synching the data later.
-Luke.
You said it much better than I did.
But of course the slower project won't die. That's the on I'm on.
Jack Corbett
Consultant - Straight Path Solutions
Check out these links on how to get faster and more accurate answers:
Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
Need an Answer? Actually, No ... You Need a Question
October 15, 2009 at 2:13 pm
Roy Ernest (10/15/2009)
Elliott W (10/14/2009)
While some of the questions have been gems.. Some of the responses, mostly from the inexperienced, are nothing shy of wild guesses based on nothing, let alone experience. Now I don't have a problem with them answering, everybody has to start somewhere, but where you can, TRY the solution you are putting forth, especially if you haven't ever done it yourself.I truly want as much participation as reasonably possible, but if you don't have any actual experience with a technology, it might make more sense to continue reading and wait to see someone else answer.
Just venting a little.
That could be me.... 🙂 I have made mistakes. But I usually ask someone to confirm if I was right or wrong. There are times when you cannot try the solution you are putting forward, maybe time constraints or lack of resources. You might be online with no SQL instances for you to test your solution in
I was refering to a case where a very inexperienced poster posted a solution for an SSIS problem that made it obvious he had never touched the technology, and his solution was one that was obvious to fail. Now, I also try not to be too hard on the novice users, we were all there, but I also don't usually comment on things I haven't done at all, or something real similar.
CEWII
October 15, 2009 at 2:15 pm
That is one area I do not even look at. As soon as I see SSIS, I skip the thread...:-) That is like a black hole for me..:-)
-Roy
October 15, 2009 at 2:28 pm
Jeff Moden (10/15/2009)
Good vent... An equally sickening event is when a supposed "expert" (usually self appointed) provides an answer with a loop in it and then, when challenged with higher performance set based code, gets all puffy and actually defends the loop method to great lengths and on all fronts. Some of those moroff's will write pages of rhetoric trying to defend their looping code and, although I don't really have time to counter, I have to counter because I don't want some other poor slob to believe in the rhetoric or the loop code.Heh... another "favorite" is when an "expert" (whether in forums, books, whatever) wants to demonstrate a performance trick... "And today we're going to show you this wonderful performance trick. To demonstrate, we need a million row test table which the following code generates..." ... and the test table generator is a bloody loop and there's no explanation as to why the loop is necessary (and that reason better NOT be to make RAND work ;-)). Yeah... performance "expert"... r-i-g-h-t.
You kow whats funny Jeff, I have a little code that I'm going to be releasing soon that has a small loop in it that I needed to work column by column. I was thinking of you when I wrote that section.. The comments actually say "-- Sorry Jeff"..
I'm always real careful about the "expert" title, I don't know if I'm an expert at anything in particular, I know I have an obscene amount of experience with SQL Server and almost all of the surrounding technologies that make it up, but as we've discussed before, the software is too big to know all of it expertly. And I know I don't know as much as some of the REAL experts, like Kalen Delaney or Gert Drapers.
You make another interesting point, people get too wrapped up in their solution and aren't open to variations that might be better. I view this as a personality flaw. Since I can't know everything and I can't consider everything how can I assume I came up with the optimal solution, I might be really close, but that other person with a little different perspective can really help. I'd like to point out Lowell from http://qa.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic751783-566-1.aspx who was open and welcomed input. THAT is the right mindset..
CEWII
October 15, 2009 at 2:45 pm
On the question of separating or uniting the common data, the question that would settle it for me is: How much work will it save to separate it now, vs how much work will it create to merge it later?
If, later on, you decide that three databases are needed, one for common data, one for one application, one for the other, and you can merge the data by simply replacing some tables with some synonyms, then separate it.
If separating it now means that you'll have to create some complex, real-time data synchronization solution later, that will involve complex triggers, query hints on locking, et al, then it's probably going to be better to start out consolidated.
That's why I said, "Yes". Both answers are valid, depending on factors not yet mentioned.
- Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
Property of The Thread
"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon
October 15, 2009 at 3:05 pm
We got another procedural junkie here. I have to go. Somebody please help me turn him from the dark side.
__________________________________________________
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain. -- Friedrich Schiller
Stop, children, what's that sound? Everybody look what's going down. -- Stephen Stills
October 15, 2009 at 3:10 pm
Bob, isn't it time for you to hit the road?
😀
For best practices on asking questions, please read the following article: Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help[/url]
October 15, 2009 at 3:42 pm
I normally prefer application specific databases. I can also see the worth of having it in the same database. It depends on the needs, the application, the skill of the developers who will be writing the code that accesses the databases.
Both methods work. But like Gus said - time and complexity involvement down the road to maintain it, should be considered when making this choice.
To play Devils advocate a little...
Why not a Common Db and then application specific dbs on the peripheral (common data in one place and then application specific data separated out into separate dbs)? Somewhat of a hybrid approach to both sides of the dilemma.
Jason...AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
_______________________________________________
I have given a name to my pain...MCM SQL Server, MVP
SQL RNNR
Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw[/url]
Learn Extended Events
October 15, 2009 at 3:49 pm
Unless the applications are always going to be inextricably linked, will never be sold separately, migrated separately, etc. then separate them. If they are inherently one thing, and will live and die together, then keep them together.
Sounds like they are inherently separate, but just happen to share some common data sets to me.
Plus, I think you should follow your instincts, and if you're a separate them kind of guy, go with that. You seem smart. Not much fashion sense, but smart. 😛
---------------------------------------------------------
How best to post your question[/url]
How to post performance problems[/url]
Tally Table:What it is and how it replaces a loop[/url]
"stewsterl 80804 (10/16/2009)I guess when you stop and try to understand the solution provided you not only learn, but save yourself some headaches when you need to make any slight changes."
October 15, 2009 at 4:38 pm
Looks like we have a String of hw questions
http://qa.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic736233-146-1.aspx
Jason...AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
_______________________________________________
I have given a name to my pain...MCM SQL Server, MVP
SQL RNNR
Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw[/url]
Learn Extended Events
October 15, 2009 at 9:01 pm
jcrawf02 (10/15/2009)
Unless the applications are always going to be inextricably linked, will never be sold separately, migrated separately, etc. then separate them. If they are inherently one thing, and will live and die together, then keep them together.Sounds like they are inherently separate, but just happen to share some common data sets to me.
Plus, I think you should follow your instincts, and if you're a separate them kind of guy, go with that. You seem smart. Not much fashion sense, but smart. 😛
Thanks. I can't disagree with anything you said, including the fashion sense. If m my wife doesn't dress me I'm lucky if I match.
In my opinion the apps are separate. Turns out I "won" in the end. We weighted and rated about 12 key things to try to come up with an objective solution and my opinion turned out to be the "better" way. Now I have to make it work.:w00t:
Jack Corbett
Consultant - Straight Path Solutions
Check out these links on how to get faster and more accurate answers:
Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
Need an Answer? Actually, No ... You Need a Question
October 15, 2009 at 9:32 pm
GilaMonster (10/14/2009)
Bob Hovious 24601 (10/14/2009)
Which galaxy?This one. What would be the point of conquering any other?
Practice? 😀
[font="Times New Roman"]-- RBarryYoung[/font], [font="Times New Roman"] (302)375-0451[/font] blog: MovingSQL.com, Twitter: @RBarryYoung[font="Arial Black"]
Proactive Performance Solutions, Inc. [/font][font="Verdana"] "Performance is our middle name."[/font]
October 16, 2009 at 3:14 am
Another urgent one
http://qa.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic803961-338-1.aspx
Quick everyone , stop what you are doing.
All he needs is the sixth row, doesnt SQL suck!
October 16, 2009 at 4:17 am
Yep, one of my associates decided to go for it 😛
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[highlight]Recommended Articles on How to help us help you and[/highlight]
[highlight]solve commonly asked questions[/highlight]
Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help by Jeff Moden[/url]
Managing Transaction Logs by Gail Shaw[/url]
How to post Performance problems by Gail Shaw[/url]
Help, my database is corrupt. Now what? by Gail Shaw[/url]
Viewing 15 posts - 8,626 through 8,640 (of 66,000 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply