3

Given the amount of views, lack-of-comments, lack-of-votes -- is the following question a bad fit for the DBA.SE site: Managing schema changes between transactional and analytical databases, and if so, why?

Also, is there a SE site that would be a better fit? An example of another site that might be a fit is SO.

| |
5

By my count, you asked 16 hours ago. That's about 6PM my time (Central US) so when most of the primary users of this site went home to spend time with their loved ones. Since then you've had about 15 people look at it, you're asking about the intermingling of two databases (specialized knowledge) and you're asking a site for experts.

But primarily, I (a moderator, one who sees more than a fair share of bad questions) can't really tell what you're asking. You give a lot of side-story, but you're not really asking a firm concrete question.

Possibly you could use some formatting to help you with that, but I imagine a complete re-write is in order. I would also encourage you to read through: http://tinyurl.com/so-hints before getting upset that you didn't have an army of monkeys flinging poo and bananas at your question.*

* meaning: Stack Overflow is not necessarily the best site for you to ask this on, you can be almost sure that you'll get a good answer there, but you really want (and need) expert answers on this topic (schema management).

| |
  • +1 @jcolebrand: Thanks, I'll reread jon-skeet's post. So, it's my fault for not being more clear, by "a bad fit for the DBA.SE site" I also meant the question my might be that clear... though, in the question itself, I point to this, and request comments if that's the case. I've been using SE for year or so, and asked 100s of questions, to me the lack of any response in the context of views seemed odd to me. Also, the question is not so much about schema management, but data management; meaning shifts in data resulting in schema mods. – blunders Feb 29 '12 at 16:10
  • 1
    Schema modifications are schema management, all the same. But yes, it's unclear what you're asking. I can see a question in there, but the simplest answer is "have a common build server that integrates new changes by automation" – jcolebrand Feb 29 '12 at 16:15
  • +1 @jcolebrand: The runtime to create an empty schema or transform it is not the issue, it's that the data within the schema must be migrated, and with a massive database (or at least massive to me) that's nothing to take lightly. Meaning my understanding of your reply is that there is no way to optimize the data transformation shifts within the schemas, and that batch updates on the effected data is the only solution; going one further to state that some form of continuous integration between the databases would also likely be a good idea. If so, sounds like an answer to me. Again, thanks. – blunders Feb 29 '12 at 16:25
  • 1
    So are you going to edit your Q? – jcolebrand Feb 29 '12 at 17:31
  • +1 @jcolebrand: Sure, I'll attempt to though, other than "it's unclear what your asking", after rereading your feedback it's I'm still not sure what edits would add value, or make the question's intent more clear. That said, I'll try. Thanks! – blunders Feb 29 '12 at 17:55
  • Completed the my attempt to improve the question's intent and structure. If you have any additional feedback, let me know. – blunders Feb 29 '12 at 18:22

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .