Re: Data Layer architecture
- From: "Wessel Troost" <nothing@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2005 11:53:09 +0200
Thanks for that? Laimis put the spirit of the post right when he said "consider tradeoffs of your decisions".Please don't feed the trolls.
One of the projects I worked on failed because it had too many layers. The design was all by the books (Microsoft's "Designing Component-Based Applications" by Mary Kirtland.) It was hard work to develop.
When we finally had the first working version, the bugfixes and requirement changes started to come in. For each requirement, we had to change the database, data access, business logic, and presentation layers. Then we had to write a converter for the database and all of the messages in the queues. Then we had to write an installer to update the application. We had made a wrong tradeoff for this particular project; the time required for the extra layers wasn't worth it. The project was cancelled.
On a next project, I used only two layers and dropped the message queues. Development speed was amazing. We were responsive to the customer's requests, and able to deliver on time.
A good learning experience though.
Greetings, Wessel .
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Data Layer architecture
- From: Alfredo Novoa
- Re: Data Layer architecture
- References:
- Data Layer architecture
- From: laimis
- Re: Data Layer architecture
- From: Nick Malik [Microsoft]
- Re: Data Layer architecture
- From: laimis
- Re: Data Layer architecture
- From: Wessel Troost
- Re: Data Layer architecture
- From: laimis
- Re: Data Layer architecture
- From: Nick Malik [Microsoft]
- Data Layer architecture
- Prev by Date: Re: Experience Kit
- Next by Date: Re: Reusing Delegate objects
- Previous by thread: Re: Data Layer architecture
- Next by thread: Re: Data Layer architecture
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|