[AccessD] On DB Bloat, Bad DB Design, and various

So let me get this straight...
You just got paid $150 to do what could have been accomplished with the
following SQL statement:

ALTER TABLE MyTable
ALTER COLUMN MyField varchar(255)

So, can you pass along my name to them?   Heck, I'd be willing to do that
for a mere $75! ;-)


-----Original Message-----
From: DWUTKA at marlow.com [mailto:DWUTKA at marlow.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2004 11:25 AM
To: accessd at databaseadvisors.com
Subject: RE: [AccessD] On DB Bloat, Bad DB Design, and various

I don't know about you Francisco, but I like to get things running the first
time.  When someone asks me to work on a system built by someone else, then
they have problems due to the original developers design, I know that it
wasn't my fault, but some customers may go 'It worked before, now you broke
it'.  

Yes, I just had to increase a field size, which only took about an hour and
a half to do. (Why?  Because the original 'size limit' was set in Access.
The system was then ported to SQL Server.  The original size limit of 35
characters (for a field to describe the exact location where an accident
occurred) was ported into SQL server also.  The IT department at the company
running this thing refused to make the change in field size (long story, not
really the IT departments fault, they were banned from messing with the
project, for a while).  So I had a little web based 'interface' to the SQL
Server.  Unfortunately, it didn't allow for actual field 'changes'.  I could
'add' and 'delete' fields.  So I had to make a temp field, run an update
query to transfer the data into the temp field.  delete the old field, make
a new field with same name, and longer field size, update the data back into
the original field, and then delete the old field.  With the amount of data
involved, and the delays in doing it through the 'web interface', it took
about an hour and a half (though I admit was fixing two fields, but it would
have taken just about as long for just that one).

So in the end, you're right, it was an easy fix, because I got $150 for
fixing it.  No sweat off of my back, because I got paid to fix it.

However, an interesting twist to this incident, that $150 was out of pocket
for the original developer, NOT the client.  The client bought the system
from the original developer.  The original developer hired me to create an
ASP interface for a portion of his system.  I did that.  The client paid for
it, then paid for him to port it to SQL Server.  I was paid to modify my
system to pay for SQL Server.  The system works, but they have issues that
have cropped up due to severe design flaws in the original system.  Since
they have paid for the completely project, he has to get the system running.
Anything where my code 'should' work, and isn't, I fix for free (so far,
only have had a few issues with handling single and double quotes).
Everything else is due to the original database design. I fixed the field
size issue, because the original developer is not very adept at working with
SQL server remotely.

Now think about that, is setting a field size limit to something close to
where you think your client won't exceed worth $150 a pop?

Drew

-----Original Message-----
From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com]On Behalf Of Francisco H
Tapia
Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 5:55 PM
To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving
Subject: Re: [AccessD] On DB Bloat, Bad DB Design, and various



DWUTKA at marlow.com wrote On 5/26/2004 3:37 PM:

>There ya go, throwing fuel on the fire! <evilgrin>
>
>Actually, it's kind of a battle over 'bad practice' again.  JC and I have
>both been burned (In my case several times, within just the past few
months)
>by a previous developer setting some arbitrary field size limit.  However,
>the only issue we have heard so far with setting it to 255 was Charlotte
had
>a Query too complex error, which is intriguing, to say the least.  But I
>haven't heard other incidents like that, so it may have been an isolated
>incident.
>  
>
How were you burned? you just had to increase a field size, how 
difficult was that?

-- 
-Francisco



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The information in this email may contain confidential information that 
is legally privileged. The information is only for the use of the intended 
recipient(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient(s), you 
are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking 
of any action in regard to the content of this email is strictly prohibited.  If 
transmission is incorrect, unclear, or incomplete, please notify the sender 
immediately. The authorized recipient(s) of this information is/are prohibited 
from disclosing this information to any other party and is/are required to 
destroy the information after its stated need has been fulfilled.

Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
sender, except where the sender specifies and with authority,
states them to be the views of Tappe Construction Co.

This footer also confirms that this email message has been scanned
for the presence of computer viruses.Scanning of this message and
addition of this footer is performed by SurfControl E-mail Filter software
in conjunction with virus detection software.