Wednesday, July 25, 2007

This has to be one of the worst planned projects in recent Database history

here is the question
I have a situation where a person can have more then one item ordered. I need to layout the information as follows:

Person Item Ordered Item Description
1 1 of 2 Item1
1 2 of 2 Item2
2 1 of 1 Item1
3 1 of 3 Item3
3 2 of 3 Item2
3 3 of 3 Item1

The information is in the same table and Item Ordered is in relationship to Person instead of Item Description.

I posted this same question on the Oracle forum, because the project is being done using two databases. Sql Server for development and Oracle for Production. I would like to get the SQL Server version of how to implement the select statement.

It gets better
Yes, it is crazy that two database are being used to develop the system, but the people who make the decisions claimed that in the preliminary stages Oracle was causing problems.
So, they switched to SQL Server as the development database. Of course the end result it that the customer expects to implement Oracle. I suspect that someone was just too lazy to learn Oracle.

And better
I asked my manager why Oracle and SQL Server and she stated that they were having load balancing issues (whatever that means). And when errors occured they were not sure how to fix them and it took too much time. At the beginning of the project there may not have been enough Oracle talent to tackle the problems. The Oracle talent available has been here for about 4 years before the project started. So, I wonder how much knowlege they DO have. I feel that an consultant should have been invested in. So, right now when stuff is put into testing for production we have to flip-flop between SQL Server and Oracle.

What? Who came up with that reason? This is just incredible. What do you think?


gregjor said...

You should check into Abject-Oriented Database practices.

Anonymous said...

Jesus Christ. That is one of the most insane things I have ever heard. If they won't fix the problems on Oracle then how do they expect to deploy it?

Chen Shapira said...

I've seen many WTF, but never one as bad as that.

Developing on one DB and deploying on another and then going back and forth for debugging?

Steve said...

I hope to have a develop enviroment as close as possible to production... for pratical reason this is not always possible... for example multiple web application running thogheter...
But!!! i Worked with SQL Server And Oracle.. they are A LOT DIFFERENT!!!!
the first i think: one have auto-increment the other have sequencies...
in the end.... ask them about their Pusher!!!!

Harel said...

I think you should hand in a resignation and run away as fast as you possible can in the opposite direction of the office doors.... imagine your sanity depends on it, as it does indeed.

Chris said...

Really if they are adamant about using Oracle for production, stick with it for development. That's just nuts. I used to believe you could develop standard SQL that supported different DB servers, but I've since learned that is just a little far from the truth (like the SQL Server's auto-identity versus Oracle's sequences).

I'd agree with harel, but if you end up staying - I'd imagine either you will really grow a lot in learning how to solve such a screwed up environment, or end up quitting later...

brad said...

Whats the backend language? If you're using an ORM that supports multiple databases it "should" help the time required to make the app run on both dbs. We're using Hibernate where I work to allow our app to run on either Oracle or SQL Server. Theres some time investment in getting that to work too though. Good luck.