Monday, December 25, 2006

My Default SOA Architecture using WCF

Continued from http://vikasnetdev.blogspot.com/2006/07/soa-friendly-architecture-version-of.htmlWith the advent of Net3.0, I am upgrading the implementation of my default SOA friendly architecture to use WCF as a medium to connect my business layer with database layer


Note: The author of this blog does not believe that you should use WebSevice/WCF in standalone application when none required. But we live in a world where we don't make rules. If you database is protected by another firewall, you may find this architecture handy. It is more important to have logically separation in architecture that will scale well if application is deployed in a distributed manner.


Here is SOA friendly Architecture


Here is deployment view


Major Components

1. UI Components/Views:
Provide User Interface

Controllers
Get the Business Objects from Gateway and provides to UI

Gateway/Factory
It is factory layer that provides the business object. It knows how to create or get the object across the network boundaries. First looks in repository if none, gets the object across the wire.Our example is going to exploit the capabilities of Web Service. It will convert the proxy object into real domain object using Mapper utility.

References:
http://www.martinfowler.com/eaaCatalog/gateway.html
http://www.martinfowler.com/eaaCatalog/repository.html
http://www.martinfowler.com/eaaCatalog/dataTransferObject.html


Business Object Manager
It populates the business object using data object. This is where one can aggregate the business objects before transferred across the network.


Business Object/Entity Object
Contains the Attributes and operations related to domain entity

Process Object/Workflow Object
Business objects collaborate together to perform some useful operations to users.


Data Object
Data Objects retrieve the data from Database. Will contain all the CRUD operations.

Here is Code.

Gateway


namespace Gateway
{
public class Contact
{
static Contact()
{
//
}
private static List contactListCache = null;
private static Object syncRoot = new Object();
public static void ClearCache()
{
lock (syncRoot)
{
contactListCache = null;
}
}
public List GetContact()
{
return ContactList;
}

public List ContactList
{
get
{
if (contactListCache == null)
{
lock (syncRoot)
{
contactListCache = new List();
ContractServiceWS.ContractServiceClient contractService = new ContractServiceWS.ContractServiceClient("WSHttpBinding_IContractService");
ContractServiceWS.Contact[] proxyContactList = contractService.GetContract();
for (int i = 0; i <= proxyContactList.Length - 1; i++) { BusinessObject.Contact contact = new BusinessObject.Contact(proxyContactList[i].UserName, proxyContactList[i].Name, proxyContactList[i].PhoneNumber, proxyContactList[i].Age); contactListCache.Add(contact); } contactListCache = (List)Converter.MapProperties_Fields((System.Collections.IList)proxyContactList, typeof(List), typeof(BusinessObject.Contact));
}


}
return (contactListCache);
}
}
}
}


namespace Gateway
{
public abstract class Mapper
{

public static object MapProperties_Fields(object SourceObj, Type DestinationType)
{
if (SourceObj == null)
{
return null;
}
Type sourceType = SourceObj.GetType();
object destinationObj = Activator.CreateInstance(DestinationType);

foreach (PropertyInfo sourceProperty in sourceType.GetProperties())
{


if (sourceProperty.Name.Equals("ExtensionData") == false)
{
MemberInfo destinationMember = DestinationType.GetMember(sourceProperty.Name)[0];

if (destinationMember.MemberType == MemberTypes.Property)
{
PropertyInfo destinationProperty = ((PropertyInfo)(destinationMember));
if ((destinationProperty.CanWrite == true))
{
if (destinationProperty.PropertyType.Equals(sourceProperty.PropertyType))
{
destinationProperty.SetValue(destinationObj, sourceProperty.GetValue(SourceObj, null), null);
}
}
}
}
}
return destinationObj;
}



public static IList MapProperties_Fields(IList SourceList, Type DestinationListType, Type DestinationElementType)
{
if (SourceList == null)
{
return null;
}
IList destinationList = ((IList)(Activator.CreateInstance(DestinationListType)));
foreach (object sourceObj in SourceList)
{
destinationList.Add(MapProperties_Fields(sourceObj, DestinationElementType));
}
return destinationList;
}
}
}





WCF Service

[ServiceContract()]
public interface IContractService
{
[OperationContract]
IList GetContract();
}

public class MyService : IContractService
{
public IList GetContract()
{
BusinessObjectManager.Contact contactManager = new BusinessObjectManager.Contact();
return contactManager.GetContacts();
}
}



Business Object Manager

namespace BusinessObjectManager
{
public class Contact
{
public List GetContacts()
{
DataTable dataTable;
List list = new List();
dataTable = DataObject.Contact.GetContact();
try
{
foreach (DataRow dataRow in dataTable.Rows)
{
BusinessObject.Contact contact = new BusinessObject.Contact(dataRow[0].ToString(), dataRow[1].ToString(), dataRow[2].ToString(), Int32.Parse(dataRow[3].ToString()));
list.Add(contact);
}
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
throw ex;
}
finally
{
dataTable = null;
}
return(list);
}
}
}



Business Object


namespace BusinessObject
{
[DataContract]
public class Contact
{
private String _userName;
private String _name;
private String _phoneNumber;
private int _age;
public Contact()
{
}
public Contact(string userName, string name,String phoneNumber, int age)
{
_userName = userName;
_name = name;
_phoneNumber = phoneNumber;
_age = age;
}
[DataMember]
public String UserName
{
get
{
return _userName;
}
set
{
_userName = value;
}
}
[DataMember]
public String Name
{
get
{
return _name;
}
set
{
_name = value;
}
}
[DataMember]
public String PhoneNumber
{
get
{
return _phoneNumber;
}
set
{
_phoneNumber = value;
}
}
[DataMember]
public int Age
{
get
{
return _age;
}
set
{
_age = value;
}
}
}
}



Data Object
namespace DataObject
{
public class Contact
{
private const String ContactTableName = "Contact";

private class Fields
{
public const string UserName = "ContactUser_Name";
public const string Name = "Contact_Name";
public const string PhoneNumber = "Contact_Phone_Number";
public const string Age = "Contact_Age";
}


public static DataTable GetContact()
{
System.Text.StringBuilder sql = new System.Text.StringBuilder();
System.Data.DataTable dataTable;

//Build the SQL

AppendBaseSelectColumns(sql);

sql.Append(" FROM");
sql.Append( " " + ContactTableName);

try
{
dataTable = GetDataTable(sql.ToString());
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
//Log the error
throw ex;
}


return(dataTable);


}

private static String AppendBaseSelectColumns(System.Text.StringBuilder sql)
{

sql.Append("SELECT");
sql.Append(" " + Fields.UserName + ",");
sql.Append(" " + Fields.Name + ",");
sql.Append(" " + Fields.PhoneNumber + ",");
sql.Append(" " + Fields.Age );
return sql.ToString();

}

private static DataTable GetDataTable(string sql)
{
//Real life one will connect to Database and return the
DataTable dataTable = new DataTable();
dataTable.Columns.Add(new DataColumn("Contact_User_Name", typeof(String)));
dataTable.Columns.Add(new DataColumn("Contact_Name", typeof(String)));
dataTable.Columns.Add(new DataColumn("Contact_Phone_Number", typeof(String)));
dataTable.Columns.Add(new DataColumn("Contact_Age", typeof(System.Int32)));
dataTable.Rows.Add(new Object[]{ "VK", "Vikas","222-222-2222",int.MaxValue});
dataTable.Rows.Add(new Object[] { "SV", "Survic", "222-222-9999", int.MaxValue });
return dataTable;

}

}
}


Presenter/Controller
namespace Presenter
{
public class ContactPresenter
{
public ContactPresenter(View.IContactView view)
{
_view = view;
_view.LookUp += new EventHandler(_view_LookUp);
_view.Persist += new EventHandler(_view_Persist);
}

private View.IContactView _view;
private BusinessObject.Contact _currentContact;


public View.IContactView View
{
get { return _view; }
}
public BusinessObject.Contact CurrentContact
{
get { return _currentContact; }
}


public void SaveContact()
{
if (_currentContact != null)
{
_currentContact.Name = _view.ContactName;
_currentContact.PhoneNumber = _view.ContactPhoneNumber;
_currentContact.Age = _view.ContactAge;
}
}

public void LookUpContactByUserName(string userName)
{
Gateway.Contact contactGateway = new Gateway.Contact();
List contactList = contactGateway.GetContact();

foreach (BusinessObject.Contact contact in contactList)
{
if (contact.UserName.ToUpper().Trim().Equals(userName.ToUpper().Trim()))
{
_currentContact = contact;
break;
}
}

_view.ContactUserName = _currentContact.UserName;
_view.ContactName = _currentContact.Name;
_view.ContactPhoneNumber = _currentContact.PhoneNumber;
_view.ContactAge = _currentContact.Age;
}

private void _view_LookUp(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
this.LookUpContactByUserName(_view.UserNameToLookUp);
}

private void _view_Persist(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
this.SaveContact();
}
}
}


Saturday, December 23, 2006

Pitfalls of Development Driven Testing -- TDD

There comes a time during battles when elite commandos have to throw away their best gadgets which may include sophisticated gears, body armors, tools and weapons and resort to hand-to-hand combat. During one of those moments, I wrote the following blog post
Confessions of a failed extreme programmer

After the fog of war was over, I was told by my colleagues about the bugs in my components in certain scenarios. These bugs would have been never there, if only I had written my unit tests. So I started writing my tests using the framework which I prepared.
To me surprise, my test was succeeding while in real condition, it should have failed. After serious debugging, I found a serious bug in my framework and as a result, 40% of my automated tests were flawed.


Well, if you survived your hand-to-hand combat, you have to oil your gear.

Moral of the story: It does not hurt to use a knife during hand-to-hand combat. Not using it may prove to be fatal. Automated Unit tests are knives to Developers locked in a mortal combat with very aggressive deadlines.

Tuesday, October 31, 2006

Why are all great developers not the best Architects and vice-versa?

I have seen lot of exceptions though.

First the philosophical spin. Michael Plat says that Architect are analytic thinkers and programmers are logical thinkers and hence the mis-match. He gives a simple test to figure out whether you are a Architect or not. I failed the test but I still believe that I have excellent Architect’s prospective. :)


I think that real issue is that strong programmer fails to abstract or trivialize certain aspects of system. They are too involved in details and thus , are unable to see the system from 18000 feet.

As Survic said, "abstract a little -- not too high level, but a little bit higher than programming - "design pattern."

If you abstract too high, it is time to ask your management to promote you to astronaut or ivory-tower architect designation. Don’t mistake me, I don’t have any contempt for them. I do think that Corporate needs them also very badly.

Sunday, October 29, 2006

.Net Pet shop 4.0 Architecture

Petshop Architecture 4.0

I have used earlier Petshop Architecture. It left a mixed feeling. It was simple to start with but not extensible enough for complex distributed computing needs.
I decided to revisit the new Petshop Architecture 4.0. My thoughts


Architectural ConcernObservationMy Rating
High level Diagramhttp://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/dnbda/html/bdasamppet409L.gifA+
Exploiting ASP.NET 2.0Generics ,Provider ,Caching, Transaction A+
Seperation of Business Logic and Persistence LogicBLL,Model,
Pattern for transferring data between Business Layer and Data LayerModel(Data Tranfer Object)A+
Optimized for Distributed ScenarioWhether Chunky Interfaces are possible between BLL and DLL Under Evaluation
Is optimized for Service Oriented Architecture? Under Evaluation
Business Rule Processor :Under Evaluation
Businses Layer Richness Under Evaluation


References
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dnbda/html/bdasamppet4.asp



Setting up PetShop Application
Setting up .Net PetShop Application has been a very daunting and time-consuming exercise.

1. Do read the ReadMe.Html File. It contain very critical steps to performed before one can run the application

2 . Try running the InstallDatabases.cmd.

3. You can Install SQL Express from this link


4. If you get error that your script is failing because remote is not allowed for SQL Express ,try this link
http://blogs.vertigosoftware.com/petshop/archive/2005/10/13/Enabling_Remote_Connections_to_SQL_Server_Express.aspx

5. If it does not work like it did not work for me , go to your
Edit \.NET Pet Shop 4.0\DatabaseScripts\Sql and run the individual scripts.

Under Security Folder in SQL Server Management Studio Express, do add your user account.


6. Edit \Web\Web.config:
a. Modify the server path in SQLProfileConnString, SQLMembershipConnString, SQLConnString1, SQLConnString2, and SQLConnString3 connection strings, using host_name\instance_name schema. Example: server=(local)\sqlexpress;.

7. Add this section after decrypting the Web.Config file using the utility DecryptWebConfig.bat

More Information
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms998283.aspx



{"The database 'MSPetShop4' is not enabled for SQL cache notification.\r\n\r\nTo enable a database for SQL cache notification, please use the System.Web.Caching.SqlCacheDependencyAdmin.EnableNotifications method, or the command line tool aspnet_regsql. To use the tool, please run 'aspnet_regsql.exe -?' for more information."}

C:\Program Files\Microsoft\.NET Pet Shop 4.0>aspnet_regsql.exe -d MsPetShop4 -ed
-E

8. You cannot enable Notification with SQL Express, so just comment the code and voila.
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/features/compare-features.mspx




Proposed changes

Monday, October 09, 2006

Agile Methodology- Process vs Anti-Process

Survic wrote very interesting comments in response to my observation on Rockford Lhotka's blog.


Since Survic has not recorded in his blog, I am reproducting it in my blog :)

Survic Wrote

Vikas said: “At least, it is giving some structure/discipline/framework where none existed”.

That remind me a weird observation of TDD in .net.

Basically, it is the downside of the same fact that Vikas pointed out.

In java, TDD represents the lightweight force -- it attracts guys who are tired of heavy process stuff. As a result, most practitioners in java TDD tend to cut corners: 100% unit testing, GUI unit testing, property unit testing? -- shut up and give me break! That is so “natural”; that goes without saying: come on, this is XP!

However, in .net TDD attracts guys who can waste time!!! -- I am sorry to say this, but it is the insight I got after a lot of surprises I got from .net’s TDD guys – TDD in .net represents process, not anti-process. It is very weird and sometimes even shameful and dishonest, in the sense that TDD is anti-process -- how can a person abuse TDD to drive the agenda to create a heavy hierarchy!

This weirdness in .Net TDD is that classic VB’s RAD is much more lightweight, so, people who likes lightweight will not be attracted to TDD. And people is the determining factor of a (sub)culture. So, TDD in .Net is pro-process!

Combining the above factor with another factor that TDD, by its default configuration, is against consulting designing, it is no wonder a person who is working on consulting framework design, and has a healthy dose of classic VB RAD sense, will be antipathy about TDD in .Net.

I am with you, Rocky ;-)

I was not sarcastic when I say “I am with you” ;-), let’s me explain:

1. We can re-interpret XP/TDD to such way that it supports or even requires using framework. It is really very simple: using a “metaphor” in XP/TDD really means picking a framework among a few well-known frameworks. Consulting in design phase means to establish the “metaphor” for a project. It requires tear apart well-known frameworks and combine those parts together.

2. The pro-process factors, which are minimal in XP’s origin (small talk), and are still heath in java (because it is fighting with heavy processes), become absolutely ridiculous in .Net -- because XP/TDD is actually fighting the classic VB RAD, go figure! So, it is right to cut those pro-process craps in TDD in .net.


Conclusion
I think that Survic has made very excellent, thought-provoking observations. After reading this, I think that I know why I have reservations about using extreme programming for a industrial-strength software (because of my process oriented bias).

I think that neither anti-process morts nor process-oriented purists are going to embrace extreme programming in .Net arena, it is going to restricted to a small cult of programmers ( I would definitely use it for short term project)

For record, I do use a hybrid of Agile and Waterfall Methodologies very successfully.

Note: I am going to refine my thoughts

Tuesday, September 26, 2006

Integrating MStests with Nant

Intgrating MSTests with Nant

MSTest.exe is command line utility which can be executed using Exec Task of Nant

MSTest Command Line Options
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms182489.aspx


BeginTag exec
program ="C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio 8\Common7\IDE\MSTest.exe" commandline="/testcontainer:C:\Projects\ProjectName\Build\WebTests\Matrix.WebApplication.Tests.dll /resultsfile:C:\Projects\ProjectName\Build\WebTests\a.trx" basedir="C:\Projects\ProjectName\Build\WebTests" >
EndTag exec

testcontainer: Load a file that contains tests
runconfig: Load a file that contains tests
resultsfile: Save the test run results to the specified file


CruiseControl and MSTests


http://confluence.public.thoughtworks.org/display/CCNET/Using+CruiseControl.NET+with+MSTest
http://blogs.blackmarble.co.uk/blogs/bm-bloggers/archive/2006/06/14/5255.aspx



Running Unit Test on Build Server
In order to run tests during build, Team Edition for Testers must be installed on the build computer. In order to run unit testing, code coverage or code analysis, Team Edition for Developers must be installed on the build computer.

http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms181712.aspx

Saturday, September 23, 2006

Design is back. Long live design

It is very encouraging to read from the experiences of agile practitioners that they think up-front design (Architecture and framework) is too important to be left implicit in any methodology. I always believed in up-front design and evolutionary design facilitated by effective refactoring and automated testing, being core parts of any methodology. There are complimentary to each other, rather than forcing a programmer to use one over another. You dismiss one; you have a very lousy software at hand.

Martin Fowler also advocates nicely in making use of best of both worlds. It makes more sense now.
http://www.martinfowler.com/articles/designDead.html


http://codebetter.com/blogs/sam.gentile/archive/2006/09/06/Being-an-Agile-Architect.aspx
Being an Agile Architect
We found that a year down the road that there was still a lot missing. Too many "infrastructure" or "framework" things were blowing by in this delirious rush to crunch out 100% business functionality every week no matter what. Someone with Architecture experience needs to perform explicitly the role of Agile Architect and restore these capabilities to a team

http://codebetter.com/blogs/scott.bellware/archive/2006/09/19/149368.aspx

Sam's post on agile architecture has led to the death of my last vestiges of my denial in regards to a need for some formal recognition of software design on an agile team.


The absence of explicit software design activities on our team has lead to some degradation of software design that is leading the code down the slippery slope to opaqueness and to the initial indications of software entropy. We're trying to add a bit more formality to software design and software design guidance into our process. Recognizing a software designer's role on the team tasked with up-front design and continuous software design quality assurance is part of this effort.


Footnote:
It pays to be a coward Extreme Programmer

Monday, September 18, 2006

Re-read Head First Design Pattern-- my rating -- 5/5

Readability : 5/5
Information about Subject : 5/5

Couple of years back when I was exposed to Design Patterns, I went on buying spree for every computer book with design pattern somewhere in title. In that buying spree, I bought this book as soon as it hit the market. Now I am glad to see that this book is on every Architect’s book shelf. If GOF’s Design Pattern book was a Bible which only high priest(C++ Guys) could read and understand, this book spread the word of Design God to ordinary mortals(vb) and connected the ordinary programmers to OOP.
After reading these books, ordinary mortals could come up with a good or not so good OOP solution but never had they gone back to procedure programming.


After reading first few chapters, I think that Strategy Pattern can very useful.

If you could never understand Command Pattern, try this book.

Tuesday, September 05, 2006

Why do I perfer Custom Collection over Dataset?

I don't like dataset as a mechanism to transfer data between two layers for following reasons

1. Not a true OOP concept
I seriously follow Rockford Lhotka's writing and agree with him on this.

2. Bad Performance.
I did some benchmarking tests on Custom Collections vs. Dataset as being transport mechanism in Web Services Scenario in Net 1.0. Custom collections performed four times better than Dataset. I am sure in remoting scenario , difference would be more dramatic. I am going to perform very soon some benchmarks tests on .Net 2.0

More Details


3. More Code
One ends up writing more code in packaging and unpackaging data in dataset.Remoting and WebServices infrastructure takes care lot of Serialization and Deserialization issue. Before Generics, by getting rid of dataset, I was able to get rid of 1000s line of code and get more performance.
Recently I did some benchmark tests on generics from my office computer (Which has less memory) and got more encouraging results. I will post them very soon on my blog

4. Not SOA friendly
If datasets are exposed through WebSerivecs, only .net Clients can use these Web-Services.

Chirdeep Shetty has very a nice post about problems that he faced to convert C# WebServices to Java WebServices because of dataset and workaround.



Having said that I may use Dataset/DataTable in following situations
1. When I have a situation where columns of a custom collection are variable. DataTable/Dataset IMO offers more clean solution.
2. Disconnected rich client architecture

Friday, August 25, 2006

Is 3 Layered Architecture = MVC

Very nice discussion is going on this thread.

http://forums.asp.net/thread/1379168.aspx

At first after reading the post, I also got confused by striking similarities between two patterns thought one is design pattern other one is application pattern.
Survic has written a nice post on confusion regarding MVC.

This is one of best articulated posts that I have come across on this topic.


If you don’t understand confusion about MVC then read

First there are two documented versions of MVC
http://www.javaworld.com/javaworld/jw-12-1999/jw-12-ssj-jspmvc.html

Here is sample of discussion on MVC and ASP.Net in which I took part
http://forums.asp.net/2/1249964/ShowThread.aspx


If you thought that this is enough then there is a MVP pattern.

Example of
http://codebetter.com/blogs/jeremy.miller/archive/2006/07/11/147305.aspx

After that Martin Fowler splits MVP into two parts to clear confusion (But now I am more confused)
http://geekswithblogs.net/billy/archive/2006/07/20/85815.aspx
http://martinfowler.com/eaaDev/PassiveScreen.html
http://martinfowler.com/eaaDev/SupervisingPresenter.html



I always use MVC as GUI or WEB based design pattern.
MVC is a design pattern for Interactive Interfaces.(LudovicoVan corrected me)
MVC in web context is more geared towards streaming HTML to different devices that understand HTML while 3 layer architecture is independent of any technology.
http://www.martinfowler.com/eaaCatalog/
http://www.martinfowler.com/eaaCatalog/modelViewController.html

One comment was that we should implement MVC in every layer of application.
I think that I know what the poster is implying.
Generally I believe in understanding the intent of pattern and implementing it my way that suits my project. But at the same time, we have to maintain some essence of design pattern for clear communication. While I understand what the poster is implying, I think that are specific patterns (factory,fascade,process layer,Aggregation etc) to describe the patterns applicable to good enterprise distributed computing needs.

Note: I am going to revisit this post

Wednesday, August 16, 2006

Showing Chinese or Japanese Characters in Charting / Graphing Tools

I was evaluating third party Charting Controls for our application. Somehow I was not able to show Chinese/Japanese characters properly on my machine. I was wondering whether it is problem with third party tools or my code. Finally after working with vendors, I found out problem was with my machine.
I am documenting this in my blog just in cause someone needs this info.

It is possible to show Chinese/Japanese characters in most of the charting tools. The only thing you need to do is have the Asian language pack installed. To do this; go to control panel -> Regional and Language Options then click on the language tab. From here, check the “install files for East Asian languages”. This will allow you to view Chinese on your machine. Once this is installed, all you need to do paste the text directly into the fields in the chart and it will show up properly.

Sunday, August 06, 2006

Domain Driven Design based on Entity Model vs E/R Model

Continued from
http://vikasnetdev.blogspot.com/2006/07/domain-driven-design-vs-data-driven.html

Survic said
“I agree with you about the size of projects; but deep in my heart, I also believe that all larger business projects can be split into smaller projects, so, I do not believe “TDD with mocks and DDD without data” is good for anything -- I will keep an open mind though”


Hi Survic,
Thanks for pointing to Scott W. Ambler.’s book ‘The Object Primer’. It helped me to write this post. That is what I wanted to articulate in first place
First thing nobody is underestimating the importance of Data in Domain Driven Design. But there are following problems or realities in Enterprise Data Design (Scott calls Legacy Database design but DBAs continue to employ for consistency purpose)

1. A single data field is use for several purposes.
2. The purpose of a data field is determined by the value of one or more other columns.
3. Inconsistent values are stored in a single data field.
4. There is inconsistent/incorrect data formatting within a column
5. Some data values are missing with in a data field
6. One or more data fields that require do not exist.
7. Additional data fields that your application will need to support if it uses the legacy data exist
8. Multiple source exist for the same data and it is not clear which one to use
9. Important entities, attributes and relationship are hidden and floating in text fields
10. Data values can stray from their field descriptions and business rules.
11. Various key strategies are used to identify the same type of entity
12. You require a relationship between data records that is not supported by legacy data.
13. One attribute is stored in several fields.
14. Special characters within a data field are inconsistently used.
15. Different data types are used for similar columns.
16. The legacy data do not contain sufficient detail.
17. The legacy data contain too much data.
18. The legacy data are read-only, yet you require update access.
19. The timeliness of data varies from what you require
20. The default value used by a legacy application does not reflect the default value required by your system.
21. Different representations of the data exist.
22. The naming conventions used are difficult to understand

As per my experience with DBAs in past,Some decisions may be right in their own way. They are more concerned about efficient storage of data; need to be consistent with existing databases (what Scott calls legacy) and future extensibility at data storage level.

Some of above factors limit the database design diagram to be used as effective communication tool with all stakeholders. We need a abstraction above database which hide these complexities and communicate more clearly Problem Domain/System Blueprints to users.

This is where come entity classes’ diagrams (Since we both agree on importance of process classes diagrams, activity diagrams, Sequence diagrams etc.) which can hide all above mentioned storage details from system users. It will help the programmer to nail down the requirement and prepare the blueprints with out waiting for database design to be over. Once requirements are completely nailed, data storage/retrieval is more implementation details.

This debate is similar to XML Hell debate. Nobody is arguing against the importance of XML but we need an abstraction/Graphical tools to hide its rawness as discussed in the following mail
http://vikasnetdev.blogspot.com/2006/06/xml-hell.html

Reference:
The Object Primer – By Scott W. Ambler

Tuesday, August 01, 2006

Domain Driven Design-- My Rating 3-4/5 -- Currently Reading

This book will influence one to employ Domain Driven Methodology even in a pure Waterfall or fixed bid project. You will not like to be caught with out a Domain blueprint in Design phase after reading first five chapters book and will know the importance of Ubiquitous Language.

My criticism of book is that if you are well-verse in design patterns,Analysis patterns ,OOP concepts that book discusses, you may find little value in chapter 6 - 13. Authors should have shortened them into two or three chapters.

If you are new to Application and Design Patterns,Analysis Patterns and OOP , you will find this book more useful.
I am glad that I read it and it is over. (read 60%). I have to still read Chapter 14-17. May be some other time.