Hi,
I wrote myself an Access db several years ago to do some things for my checkbook and budgeting and I've really enjoyed it ever since. Lately I've been thinking about writing it as a stand alone program so I could let my family and friends use too (I don't want it to be Access dependent because I don't want to have to troubleshoot and support it on different versions of Access or MDAC).
Anyway, recently I took a class on OO programming logic and a C++ class, and as I was thinking of how to design it, I was thinking in terms of objects. For instance, a transaction would be an object with attributes like a date, amount, etc. But then I realized that designing it this way seems to be fundamentally different from the way I did it originally with Access. So it looks like the first big decision I have to make is to decide whether to use object oriented db design or relational db design. Is this true, and if yes, which way would be better to go for a checkbook/budgeting app?
Thanks for your help.
OODB or RDB for checkbook/budget program?
Started by cople, Jul 11 2009 08:15 AM
9 replies to this topic
#1
Posted 11 July 2009 - 08:15 AM
|
|
|
#2
Posted 11 July 2009 - 09:43 AM
I don't think there's a "Better", however I would use SQLite, which is an RDB.
#3
Posted 11 July 2009 - 12:09 PM
Gotcha.
I was reading here at - wiki.python.org/moin/SQLite - that SQLite only supports NULL, INTEGER, FLOAT, TEXT and BLOB data types unless you use its "pysqlite types mode" and in such case "things can get a little nastier".
What does this mean?
Does it only apply if one is using Python?
Should it be a concern?
Thanks.
I was reading here at - wiki.python.org/moin/SQLite - that SQLite only supports NULL, INTEGER, FLOAT, TEXT and BLOB data types unless you use its "pysqlite types mode" and in such case "things can get a little nastier".
What does this mean?
Does it only apply if one is using Python?
Should it be a concern?
Thanks.
#4
Posted 13 July 2009 - 07:50 AM
Most RDBs only support those types. I would NOT recommend extending the types. Instead, I would craft your solution with the database requirements in mind.
#5
Posted 13 July 2009 - 09:34 AM
So I wouldn't be able to have a DATE type? What effects would/does this have on how I code? In other words, how do you code differently when the db has limited types to use?
Thanks.
Thanks.
#6
Posted 13 July 2009 - 09:46 AM
You could store a string of the date and use the programming language you coded it in to do the work instead of the sql
#7
Posted 13 July 2009 - 03:22 PM
A date can also be stored as an integer number of days from a fixed date. Take advantage of the date operations in your language :)
#8
Posted 13 July 2009 - 04:04 PM
So you use the language to handle the types? And therefore no functionality is lost?
#9
Posted 13 July 2009 - 04:41 PM
#10
Posted 17 July 2009 - 10:50 AM
Thanks for the help and the info.


Sign In
Create Account


Back to top










