|
I can't disagree much. You don't show up at a new job and immediately start telling people they should redo everything using something you prefer, no matter what the pros and cons might be.
|
|
|
|
|
dandy72 wrote: You don't show up at a new job and immediately start telling people they should redo everything using something you prefer, no matter what the pros and cons might be.
To be fair those that are ignorant and inexperienced might do that.
|
|
|
|
|
So is this what happened here?
|
|
|
|
|
kmoorevs wrote: I'm an old guy Not as old as this guy[^].
It was broke, so I fixed it.
|
|
|
|
|
He has a point TBH. You can't "migrate" a col\row based database like Access to an hierarchical one like Mongo. Also it's not just the DB but the things that use it....they will need rewritten and retested. Also anyone who says Mongo is easier to maintain than Access would probably get fired on the spot if I had my way. And Mongo more secure? Didn't a whole bunch of companies get their data hacked because Mongo's default security is "off" so anyone can trawl the net for open ports and get what they want?
This sounds like fresh-out-of-uni idealism. You have to respect that in the real world we do have ties to old systems and things are done a certain way for a reason, and it's unlikely you'll appreciate that if it's your first day on the job.
|
|
|
|
|
F-ES Sitecore wrote: a col\row based database like Access to an hierarchical one like Mongo Are you suggesting that Access is not a hierarchical db?
There are two kinds of people in the world: those who can extrapolate from incomplete data.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why? You can create relationships between tables in Access.
There are two kinds of people in the world: those who can extrapolate from incomplete data.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Relationships don't make something hierarchical. In Access if you have Order and OrderItem they are two different tables and if you want the Order you do a look-up on Order and if you want the OrderItem you do another lookup using OrderID as a where filter. They are separate buckets of info. With Mongo the data is stored in a hierarchal manner. So once you find the Order, that order has a collection of OrderItems directly inside it.
|
|
|
|
|
I see. Thanks for the explanation.
There are two kinds of people in the world: those who can extrapolate from incomplete data.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
I guess she was told it was a dot net SQL environment they were working in?
|
|
|
|
|
Tell her we all said, "Welcome to the real world."
She needs to just observe and learn the culture for a while before telling the existing employees that they are doing everything "wrong".
I still have to delve into Delphi 6 (circa 2000) code that uses Paradox as the database for crying out loud.
|
|
|
|
|
since when do employers really listen to their employees, particularly a newbie vs. some old coot that's been there way too long (and worse still may be a friend of the boss / director.)
wait a while till the boss knows you're both human doing OK at your job, once that traction achieved suggest they need to review/upgrade before their tech doesn't fit the real word (interface etc.) Suggest they retain consultants to do a full review because they are at risk of loosing a lot of business if they don't upgrade to match their supply/sales chains.
sometimes they really do have to pay to accept the truth, whereas if it's just you saying it even 10 years on the old coot's still always going to have the upper hand. (unless sleeping with the boss - but no, don't do that: it never ends well.)
Format Success.
Welcome to your new signa&*(gD@@@ @@@@@@*@x@@
|
|
|
|
|
Lopatir wrote: Suggest they retain consultants to do a full review because they are at risk of loosing a lot of business if they don't upgrade to match their supply/sales chains.
Excluding those where the the sale involved a product and the customer wanted a specific database, I have never seen any customer care what database the company was using.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, that to point I agree. Devs tend to always come off as treating people like they are stupid. So maybe it was the way she did it. Who knows, we weren't there. But you have a good point.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
MarkTJohnson wrote: She needs to just observe and learn the culture for a while before telling the existing employees that they are doing everything "wrong". My reaction as well. Your second day is not the one to argue with the coxswain over the type of oars. Just get in the damned boat and row!
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
And to sum up this thread and a note to all you young whippersnappers, may you be blessed by your energy and idealism:
If you are good, learn some things, and don't do anything exceptionally stupid, you may one day be "that old coot".
Charlie Gilley
<italic>Stuck in a dysfunctional matrix from which I must escape...
"Where liberty dwells, there is my country." B. Franklin, 1783
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
|
|
|
|
|
Alright, just trying to find an analogy here.
Let's say a new hire is assigned to add a new form to a php web site. While being introduced to the web site code, the new hire explains how stupid PHP is and the web site should be rewritten using Java Spring MVC hosted on a Web Sphere application server and provides examples from an tutorial googled during the session.
That is how I see it, am I doing it wrong?
modified 20-Oct-19 21:02pm.
|
|
|
|
|
On your second day? Yep, you are doing it wrong. That is NOT the way to get ahead. You have to earn some trust and respect before you go trying to change the world and you shouldn't use the word stupid. This is the voice of experience speaking. I had to go to sensitivity training because I called something stupid, even though it was contrary to the goals of my project and company, and it was being pushed for by a consultant.
|
|
|
|
|
When I hear about sensitivity training, I always picture something like this
modified 20-Oct-19 21:02pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Termi Nater wrote: That is how I see it, am I doing it wrong?
Yes.
Where in your statement are you taking into account the large cost of doing that?
Companies do not get paid in technology. They get paid in money. If it costs then it subtracts from income.
So where does your solution add to the income of the company?
Termi Nater wrote: While being introduced to the web site code, the new hire explains how stupid PHP
And I should note also that I have not seen any evidence that currently PHP is choice that will make a company suffer. PHP has been around for a while and is still maintaining its market share.
Note that doesn't mean it cannot be implemented badly but that is true for any technology.
And just to be clear I don't do PHP.
|
|
|
|
|
S Houghtelin wrote: So she tried showing him some examples of how much easier it would be to maintain and update the tables
Did she also demonstrate how much the migration would cost, how much the QA would cost, and as applicable how much it would cost to redo all of the other code that accessed the database and QA for that as well?
And what about the retraining costs?
|
|
|
|
|
Forgetting/ignoring training costs is all too common with engineers.
(Many years ago, the VP of training at a prospective customer gave me a cost and logistics breakdown of retraining for even the simplest UI change. It was more than I expected. It also explains one reason the company chose not to switch vendors.)
|
|
|
|
|
Technology aside, I've experienced that kind of response with coworkers. There isn't much that you can do, especially if you're their lead and on probation. The best thing for her is to suck it up and see how things unravel. If she goes to work somewhere else as a full-time employee, she might experience the same thing over again; you never know, unless you try.
|
|
|
|
|
Can't put my finger on it, but it feels related to your sig somehow .
|
|
|
|