Kolwrath
Imperial Shipment
   |
Posted - 2008.05.30 15:37:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Kolwrath on 30/05/2008 15:51:23
 Originally by: Kuroshiro
Honestly? No I didn't. I'm like 99% of the customers on this planet in that I'm really not interested in what limitations poor planning in your database have created in your product, I just would like to see a solution engineered to correct or work around this deficiency in your interface. This should not be the least bit of a shock to any experienced engineer.
Also, if I were to talk to my company's customers the way you just spoke to me -- well, I'm not 100% sure what would happen, but I would certainly never be allowed to talk to customers again and it would definitely show up the next time I was up for a raise. There's just no excuse for it that lack of professionalism, no matter how stupid you think the question is.
Wow you way out of line here. You do not know what your talking about. Please read up on database normalization. Way, way out of line.
To CCP:
I originally thought you guys could do a simple join to the attributes table in order to read that data, but then I realized that it would add alot of overhead.
What about simply creating a new ItemID for BPOs that is different from BPCs?
This would solve the BPC contract scams, and also fix this BPC/ BPO identification issue.
Yes its kinda clunky, and goes almost completly against the ideas of a heavily normalised DB (reduced data replication) ... but it would work.
<edit>
Originally by: Kuroshiro
Then they're taking their work too personally. I was merely stating that the current design has limitations that need to be worked around and would have been better to plan for from the start. There was not, encapsulated within that, the implication that the database designers are poor at their jobs or that the database is a complete failure (it clearly is not).
You need to word your replies better. You essentially said that CCP DB's did a crap job. That may not have been your intent, but that is how it came across.
Walking up to anyone and saying that thier work is crap is not going to go over well. I doubt you will, but apologizing might be a good idea.
Yes this is an item that was probably looked at in the design stage, but they chose to heavily normalize the DB for performance and size reasons, and the trade off was the removal of the ability to differentiate BPOs from BPCs without a second DB lookup (or a JOIN) in the process.
</edit>
Originally by: Chaos Space Marines
Do you hear the voices, too?!?!
|