• brian.j.parker (unregistered) in reply to Stark

    I think we might have mentioned it in passing. It is a common type of "Inner-platform effect" antipattern. I agree with the comments that everybody who works with databases has probably seen it at least once; I sure have.

  • Martin (unregistered) in reply to J.K.

    Joel... is this you?

  • (cs) in reply to brian.j.parker
    brian.j.parker:
    I think we might have mentioned it in passing. It is a common type of "Inner-platform effect" antipattern. I agree with the comments that everybody who works with databases has probably seen it at least once; I sure have.

    Inner-platforms are only an anti-pattern if it takes considerable effort to create the new platform. Otherwise, they merely represent abstractions. Haskell's functors and monads are ideal for creating new layers of algebraically compatible abstraction, with minimal work (injecting the "original platform" into the new one with fmap and liftM and friends).

    A functor instance for data F x = F x looks like:

    instance Functor F where fmap f (F x) = F (f x)

    That is, fmap is the commutator for F and any other functor named f in the algebra of functorial actions on x. This is precisely what the "inner platform (anti-)pattern" is trying to describe. Most languages are bad at this kind of abstraction. Most OO people would use the factory pattern to implement a functor.

  • The Fixer (unregistered)

    I re-wrote the story, removing all of the irrelevant details:

    José knew exactly what he expected from the interview. The company was a startup...

    ...Lisa, one of their database people...took a hard left into Wacky Park.

    "We're thinking of storing table names and columns in a database table. It's an idea we've been floating around."

    ...José agreed that he probably wouldn't be a good fit.

  • Not As Think As You Drunk I Am (unregistered) in reply to uuang
    uuang:
    TheSHEEEP:
    Hmm...

    The Expendables?

    Jackass?

    Definitely The Hangover.

  • 32gen (unregistered)

    It's databases all the way down

  • TheSHEEEP (unregistered) in reply to Not As Think As You Drunk I Am
    Not As Think As You Drunk I Am:
    uuang:
    TheSHEEEP:
    Hmm...

    The Expendables?

    Jackass?

    Definitely The Hangover.

    Transformers 2?

  • Ouch! (unregistered) in reply to Krenn
    Krenn:
    Someone You Know:
    Are you just trolling here, or is there some legitimate sense in which "don't" can be used as a noun that I'm unaware of?

    Yes. A "fashion don't" is an example of terrible fashion.

    Redundancy alert!

  • Remy Porter (unregistered)

    Ah...The Daily Worse Than Fiction

  • English Man (unregistered)

    TRWTF is Americans.

  • frits (unregistered) in reply to Someone You Know
    Someone You Know:
    Are you just trolling here, or is there some legitimate sense in which "don't" can be used as a noun that I'm unaware of?
    Indeed. I believe you just did so.
  • (cs) in reply to frits
    frits:
    Someone You Know:
    Remy Porter's Comments:
    His first warning should have been that she was wearing two mismatched plaids, a fashion don't even naked robots recognize.

    Did Mark write that sentence for you, Remy?

    Now we're going to start picking on HTML comments?

    "Don't" is a noun in that sentence. Now try reading it again.

    I'm getting a little tired of all the Remy hate. And I usually love hate.

    P.S. - Hate is a noun in that last sentence.

  • (cs) in reply to English Man
    English Man:
    TRWTF is Americans.

    Because of our exceptional smiles?

  • (cs) in reply to frits
    frits:
    English Man:
    TRWTF is Americans.
    Because of our exceptional smiles?
    NICE! That right there is why I'm your biggest fan.
  • Bert Glanstron (unregistered) in reply to frits
    frits:
    English Man:
    TRWTF is Americans.

    Because of our exceptional smiles?

    Dear frits,

    In case you can’t tell, this is a grown-up place. The fact that you insist on using dentists clearly shows that you’re country is too young and too stupid to be colonizing America.

    Go away and grow up.

    Sincerely, Bert Glanstron

  • boog (unregistered) in reply to hoodaticus
    hoodaticus:
    frits:
    Someone You Know:
    Remy Porter's Comments:
    His first warning should have been that she was wearing two mismatched plaids, a fashion don't even naked robots recognize.

    Did Mark write that sentence for you, Remy?

    Now we're going to start picking on HTML comments?

    "Don't" is a noun in that sentence. Now try reading it again.

    I'm getting a little tired of all the Remy hate. And I usually love hate.

    P.S. - Hate is a noun in that last sentence.

    I think it all goes back to that article he destroyed in July because he had two fifths the night before.

  • da Doctah (unregistered) in reply to boog
    boog:
    hoodaticus:
    frits:
    Someone You Know:
    Remy Porter's Comments:
    His first warning should have been that she was wearing two mismatched plaids, a fashion don't even naked robots recognize.

    Did Mark write that sentence for you, Remy?

    Now we're going to start picking on HTML comments?

    "Don't" is a noun in that sentence. Now try reading it again.

    I'm getting a little tired of all the Remy hate. And I usually love hate.

    P.S. - Hate is a noun in that last sentence.

    I think it all goes back to that article liver he destroyed in July because he had two fifths the night before.
    FTFY (fifths is a noun in that sentence).

  • KP (unregistered)

    Everyone has interviews like this, and I take the opportunity to turn the tables and ask/answer the questions that they should ask for them.

    I've gone to interviews with cheat sheets of answers to questions that I though they should ask, and when I see that the interviewer is bumbling through and obviously didn't prepare I hand them my cheat sheet and then we can have a meaningful conversation about my skills and experiences. Some people might find this to be too forward, but you might as well, you're probably not going to get the job anyhow because the interviewer didn't prepare, and will only discover what they should be asking like 12 interviews into the process.

    Until you've had to interview people, you don't really realize the amount of preparation that should go into it.

  • frits (unregistered) in reply to KP
    KP:
    Everyone has interviews like this, and I take the opportunity to turn the tables and ask/answer the questions that they should ask for them.

    I've gone to interviews with cheat sheets of answers to questions that I though they should ask, and when I see that the interviewer is bumbling through and obviously didn't prepare I hand them my cheat sheet and then we can have a meaningful conversation about my skills and experiences. Some people might find this to be too forward, but you might as well, you're probably not going to get the job anyhow because the interviewer didn't prepare, and will only discover what they should be asking like 12 interviews into the process.

    Until you've had to interview people, you don't really realize the amount of preparation that should go into it.

    I agree. I mean, who hasn't had to do something like this?
  • (cs) in reply to SomeCoder
    SomeCoder:
    MST3K anonymization FTW!
    J.K. Robertson:
    Get out of my office!
    You mean your mezzanine, sir?
  • Mark (unregistered) in reply to frits
    frits:
    Someone You Know:
    Remy Porter's Comments:
    His first warning should have been that she was wearing two mismatched plaids, a fashion don't even naked robots recognize.

    Did Mark write that sentence for you, Remy?

    Now we're going to start picking on HTML comments?

    "Don't" is a noun in that sentence. Now try reading it again.

    "fashion don't" is a noun-phrase in this sentence, and there is an implied ellipsis, the word "that" has been left out.

    a fashion-don't that even naked robots recognize.

  • Mr.'; Drop Database -- (unregistered)

    This site has the grammarest comments I've ever seen.

  • Antoine (unregistered) in reply to Mr.'; Drop Database --

    Hide your servers, hide your workstations, They're databasing errbody out here

  • (cs) in reply to Grammer Nazi
    Grammer Nazi:
    Incorrect. Writing is about communication, so if it aids communication you should include it. The stuff we English professors gripe about is when you use a superfluous "that" which does not assist the understanding of the message and that is only put in to fulfill a word or page count for an assignment.
    Irony overload!
    frits:
    Yeah, but then people would complain about the needless use of "that", which is a writing don't even robots could understand. Let's not forget that the original quote was an HTML comment not even visible to the casual viewer.
    FTFY
  • chris (unregistered) in reply to Mr.'; Drop Database --
    Mr.'; Drop Database --:
    This site has the grammarest comments I've ever seen.
    Don't you mean the don'test?
  • Crow T. Robot (unregistered) in reply to SomeCoder
    SomeCoder:
    uuang:
    Web Dude:
    In addition to the two plaids, I wonder if Lisa also commutes to work using an old Dodge K-car?

    I love obscure MST3K references...although it's been a while since I've seen the Time Chasers episode!

    Bah, I thought I would be the only one!

    I wonder if JK Robertson eventually shot Pink Boy (AKA Matthew) during a wacky adventure back in time during the American Revolution...

    MST3K anonymization FTW!

    And a phalanx of developers come swooping down- well, some commenters from the thedailywtf pulls up in a K-car.

  • ICG (unregistered) in reply to Bert Glanstron
    Bert Glanstron:
    The fact that you insist on using dentists clearly shows that you’re country is too young and too stupid to be colonizing America.

    You are speaking of stupidity and don't know when to use "you're" and when "your"? BTW: English is not my native language.

  • Altimeter (unregistered) in reply to Grammer Nazi
    Grammer Nazi:
    The Article:
    Lisa's smile sublimated into vapor.
    FTFY. The definition of "sublimated" is to become vapor. The use of "into vapor" is redundant.

    Actually you can sublimate in the other direction, from vapor into a solid, so it's not redundant.

  • minim (unregistered) in reply to Mr Picky
    Mr Picky:
    So what are the benefits of 'paritioning' ?
    Do you know of a better way of maintaining database parity?
  • ingenium (unregistered) in reply to ICG
    ICG:
    Bert Glanstron:
    The fact that you insist on using dentists clearly shows that you’re country is too young and too stupid to be colonizing America.

    You are speaking of stupidity and don't know when to use "you're" and when "your"? BTW: English is not my native language.

    English may have started in England, but us Americans have sublimated the language into something much more refined.

  • Design Pattern (unregistered) in reply to will
    will:
    BMC RemedyAgony is one product that shipps like this.
    FTFY!
    will:
    Most tables are all generic with named and there is another table that indicates the table name and column and from that you can find what is stored.
    And this explains its disastrous performance!
  • Design Pattern (unregistered) in reply to The Corrector
    The Corrector:
    Remy Porter:
    No idea who that is. Honestly, one of these days, I'm going to sit down and build a death-metal version of Cornify- the same idea, but y'know, all the unicorns are death metal themed, and the rainbows will only be colored red and black and possibly bleed. And they'd still sparkle.

    It'll be slayer.

    FTFY
    FTFY

  • Raptor85 (unregistered) in reply to drusi

    Look up "remedy" from BMC, it does exactly this. (you have to look up column and table names in the database, in oracle itself they're all called C00001214 C002300 etc...)

    Terrible software, expensive and fairly widely used as well :/

  • Raptor85 (unregistered) in reply to Raptor85

    bah..someone beat me to it....glad I'm not the only one who agonizes with that POS

  • (cs) in reply to banananananana
    banananananana:
    TheCPUWizard:
    Two comments...
    1. Every major relational database IS a "database in a database", all of the tales, columns, etc are infact stored in tables...

    select * from syscat.[tables|columns|views|references|triggers];

    (quess that specific rdb)

    DB2? Oracle? Can't remember, but I've done that before. Probably DB2.

    I respond to that with:

    SELECT * FROM sys.[objects|tables|views|all_tables|all_objects]

    even more hilarity ensues that it can be seen as sys.sysobjects as well.

    IBM's Tivoli LDAP server is an even funnier situation ... LDAP Database inside a Relational Database!!!!

  • Grammer Nazi (unregistered) in reply to Altimeter
    Altimeter:
    Grammer Nazi:
    The Article:
    Lisa's smile sublimated into vapor.
    FTFY. The definition of "sublimated" is to become vapor. The use of "into vapor" is redundant.

    Actually you can sublimate in the other direction, from vapor into a solid, so it's not redundant.

    Nope, sorry, but thanks for playing. Pick up a copy of a dictionary the next time your picking up you're prescription drugs.

  • (cs) in reply to Grammer Nazi
    Grammer Nazi:
    Altimeter:
    Grammer Nazi:
    The Article:
    Lisa's smile sublimated into vapor.
    FTFY. The definition of "sublimated" is to become vapor. The use of "into vapor" is redundant.

    Actually you can sublimate in the other direction, from vapor into a solid, so it's not redundant.

    Nope, sorry, but thanks for playing. Pick up a copy of a dictionary the next time your picking up you're prescription drugs.

    I wonder if this pattern of grammar/spelling/syntax Nazis violating rules of grammar, spelling, or syntax - in the very act of criticizing someone else for the same - might be made rekursive.

  • Zongo (unregistered) in reply to Grammer Nazi
    Grammer Nazi:
    The Article:
    Lisa's smile sublimated into vapor.
    FTFY. The definition of "sublimated" is to become vapor. The use of "into vapor" is redundant.

    http://www.jacweb.org/Archived_volumes/Text_articles/V11_I1_Horning.htm

    This is not a question of Grammer or grammar. It is a deeper question of readability and cohesion.

  • (cs) in reply to Mark
    Mark:
    frits:
    Someone You Know:
    Remy Porter's Comments:
    His first warning should have been that she was wearing two mismatched plaids, a fashion don't even naked robots recognize.

    Did Mark write that sentence for you, Remy?

    Now we're going to start picking on HTML comments?

    "Don't" is a noun in that sentence. Now try reading it again.

    "fashion don't" is a noun-phrase in this sentence, and there is an implied ellipsis, the word "that" has been left out.

    a fashion-don't that even naked robots recognize.

    That would be incorrect. The choice of how to write a new compound noun is up to the people who use the word, but it's binding as far as grammar is concerned once a consensus is reached for a long enough time. Search engine results indicate that "fashion don't" is the proper string representation of the word. I couldn't really find anyone using your way.

  • Just Some Dork (unregistered) in reply to frits
    frits:
    Now we're going to start picking on HTML comments?

    "Don't" is a noun in that sentence. Now try reading it again.

    Anything in the article is fair game.

    And it wouldn't be TRDWTF without a pile of "look how smart I am" comments from people who, and let's be fair here, need help to tie their own shoelaces.

  • (cs) in reply to hoodaticus
    hoodaticus:
    Grammer Nazi:
    Altimeter:
    Grammer Nazi:
    The Article:
    Lisa's smile sublimated into vapor.
    FTFY. The definition of "sublimated" is to become vapor. The use of "into vapor" is redundant.

    Actually you can sublimate in the other direction, from vapor into a solid, so it's not redundant.

    Nope, sorry, but thanks for playing. Pick up a copy of a dictionary the next time your picking up you're prescription drugs.

    I wonder if this pattern of grammar/spelling/syntax Nazis violating rules of grammar, spelling, or syntax - in the very act of criticizing someone else for the same - might be made rekursive.

    Sure. It's called Muphry's Law.
  • M2tM (unregistered)

    Again, EAV. I've found a use for EAV in custom user created fields for a content management system, but it's a bad idea to use all over the place.

  • oheso (unregistered) in reply to The Grenger
    The Grenger:
    Stark:
    Didn't we do the database in a database thing already?

    Like XML files being stored in a database?

    Take a look at how .NET applications store membership profile information.

  • d (unregistered)

    I do think that most of the liars in an interview are the employers. Employers do have all possible funny questions, quiz, personality checks. But are they really able to accept somebody in an interview screening the company, finding pitfalls or may be stating "you are doing crap" ?

  • (cs)

    TRWTF in many interviews I have attended is being asked questions totally unrelated to what I am going to be doing and therefore what is required of me.

    This has led to me not getting jobs I was totally qualified to do, and also to get jobs only to find there was nothing for me to do there that used my primary skills.

  • Jim Reaper (unregistered) in reply to frits
    frits:
    frutz:
    frits:
    The Grenger:
    Stark:
    Didn't we do the database in a database thing already?

    Like XML files being stored in a database?

    What wrong with XML files being stored in a database? Who hasn't done something like this?
    Give it up fake frits, it's not going to work.
    You won't get far in your Java career before you discover that some technologies require configuration, and XML is the only way to do it. Yes, there are more elegant ways that storing the plain-text XML in the database, but none are simpler.

    JSON. Groovy. Both as expressive as XML, both more succinct and simpler, and I claim my £5

  • d (unregistered) in reply to Jim Reaper

    ASN.1: abstract syntax notation 1 ?

  • Jeremy (unregistered) in reply to wtf
    wtf:
    Someone You Know:
    Are you just trolling here, or is there some legitimate sense in which "don't" can be used as a noun that I'm unaware of?

    You mean, as in "Jeremy was wearing a whole collection of fashion don'ts this morning"? Seriously, who hasn't said something like this?

    Nobody has ever said that.

  • Jeremy (unregistered) in reply to ingenium
    ingenium:
    ICG:
    Bert Glanstron:
    The fact that you insist on using dentists clearly shows that you’re country is too young and too stupid to be colonizing America.

    You are speaking of stupidity and don't know when to use "you're" and when "your"? BTW: English is not my native language.

    English may have started in England, but we Americans have sublimated the language into something much more gaseous.

  • (cs) in reply to Just Some Dork
    Just Some Dork:
    frits:
    Now we're going to start picking on HTML comments?

    "Don't" is a noun in that sentence. Now try reading it again.

    Anything in the article is fair game.

    And it wouldn't be TRDWTF without a pile of "look how smart I am" comments from people who, and let's be fair here, need help to tie their own shoelaces.

    Pointing and laughing at people with below-130 IQ's is what makes this great site what it is!

Leave a comment on “Technically an Interview”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article