List:General Discussion« Previous MessageNext Message »
From:Andy Wallace Date:March 13 2009 7:20pm
Subject:Re: avoiding use of Nulls
View as plain text  
aaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrggggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh


michael@stripped wrote:
>> On Fri, 13 Mar 2009, michael@stripped wrote:
>>
>>> Explanation(5): The more you understand how the database is to be used,
>>> and the more complexity and thought you put into your database design,
>>> the
>>> less complex it will be to retrieve reliable information out of it.
>>> Furthermore, (and this is probably what makes me crazy when Nulls are
>>> evolved) after a ten year stretch of software development, where I and a
>>> team designed our own databases, I did a nine year stretch of
>>> statistical
>>> programming, using databases designed by other people, and Nulls in the
>>> data made the results unpredictable, and yeah, made me crazy! I had to
>>> write nightly processes to resolve inconsistencies in the data, if at
>>> least report inconsistencies. You know the old saying "Garbage in =
>>> Garbage out", to me Nulls are garbage, and if there is a good reason for
>>> nulls to be a part of good clean data then someone please help me
>>> understand that.
>> Hi
>>
>> I'm in a argumentative mood today too. :-)
>>
>> I have a database logging weather data. When a station does not report a
>> temperature, it is set to NULL. It would be a very bad idea to set it to 0
>> as this would ruin the whole statistics.
>>
>> NULL is a perfectly valid information in many cases.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Thomas
>>
> 
> 
> OK! I do understand, thank you.
> 
> But hypothetically speaking, what value would you use if you didn't have a
> "I don't what this is" value  like null?
> 
> I ask this because I started programming when NULL was really zero, and
> part of the ASCII collating sequence.
> 
>  I'd use -99999.9999, I'd never allow a "i don't know what it is" value
> like Null in my database.
> 
> 
> Mike.
> 
Thread
The <=> operatorMorten13 Mar
  • Re: The <=> operatorMichael13 Mar
    • avoiding use of Nulls (was: The <=> operator)Ray13 Mar
      • Re: avoiding use of Nulls (was: The <=> operator)michael13 Mar
        • Re: avoiding use of Nulls (was: The <=> operator)Thomas Spahni13 Mar
          • Re: avoiding use of Nulls (was: The <=> operator)michael13 Mar
            • Re: avoiding use of NullsAndy Wallace13 Mar
              • Re: avoiding use of NullsArthur Fuller14 Mar
            • Re: avoiding use of NullsPJ13 Mar
            • Re: avoiding use of Nulls (was: The <=> operator)Claudio Nanni14 Mar
              • Re: avoiding use of Nulls (was: The <=> operator)Morten14 Mar
              • Re: avoiding use of Nulls (was: The <=> operator)michael14 Mar
                • Re: avoiding use of Nulls (was: The <=> operator)Mattia Merzi15 Mar
                • Re: avoiding use of Nulls (was: The <=> operator)Claudio Nanni15 Mar
                  • Re: avoiding use of Nulls (was: The <=> operator)Don Read15 Mar
                    • W2008 Server Issues?MCUSA)16 Mar
                      • Re: W2008 Server Issues?David M. Karr16 Mar
            • Re: avoiding use of Nulls (was: The <=> operator)Mattia Merzi14 Mar
        • Re: avoiding use of Nulls (was: The <=> operator)Ray14 Mar
          • Re: avoiding use of NullsAMichel Durand14 Mar
      • Getting single results per (left) record with INNER JOINNigel Peck13 Mar
        • Re: Getting single results per (left) record with INNER JOINNigel Peck13 Mar
          • Re: Getting single results per (left) record with INNER JOINArthur Fuller14 Mar
            • Re: Getting single results per (left) record with INNER JOINNigel Peck14 Mar
              • Re: Getting single results per (left) record with INNER JOINJohan De Meersman15 Mar
                • Re: Getting single results per (left) record with INNER JOINNigel Peck15 Mar
        • Re: Getting single results per (left) record with INNER JOINJoerg Bruehe16 Mar