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

Hey, I also develop in SQL Server.  It isn't 'derailing' my point, it is
missing my point.  There is a difference.

If you don't set your fields to 'can grow' when needed, and you can't
explain to the users that if they type data long then the box you give them,
then you do have problems.  Big problems.

Drew

-----Original Message-----
From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com]On Behalf Of Francisco H
Tapia
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2004 11:11 AM
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 4:28 PM:

>Ugh.  No, that is not where that argument goes.  You are building them a
>tool in Access.  Access suffices for their needs.  Why limit them even
>further?  If it makes you happy, set the field limit to 254, if you don't
>want to set it to Access' maximum.  The point is, if you think that you'll
>probably never go over 50, so you set it at 55, to give yourself 5 extra
>characters, why not go the entire way, IN ACCESS, and just use 255.  If you
>think it is going to be an issue with reporting, or whatever, if someone
>puts in more then 50 characters, include data validation that tells the
user
>that an Address, or Name, or whatever field it is, of that length may not
>display properly in some reports.  
>
>  
>
What good is data if they can't use it?  If your reports don't display 
it and they (tho not all clients) aren't smart enough to know to scroll 
or CTRL-A to get the entire field, what does it matter how "big" you 
make the field.  One of the arguments for the max LENGTH was that it 
would avoid an unnecessary visit to the client side, however you're 
still going to have visit them to fix a report or a screen.  So what's 
the difference, that they can store it?, what does it matter, to them 
they will still say it's "CUT OFF"

and YES, I have had this occur, maybe not in the last 3 months but I 
haven't done any contract work in over a year.

>Please stop bringing up the move to SQL server, it's getting very
redundant,
>and it isn't the point I am trying to make (nor JC).
>  
>
I don't think it to be redundant, just that it derails the "POINT" 
you're trying to make.  Not everyone lives in a bubble and some of us do 
develop in other engines other than Access, such as MS Sql or mySQL.. 
and by your logic, I should just use the maximum field length because 
it's THERE.

-- 
-Francisco


-- 
_______________________________________________
AccessD mailing list
AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com