Code First, do you like it?
-
If you ever meet me: You won't like me before I had three mugs of strong coffee that day. Just see my signature.. :)
Get me coffee and no one gets hurt!
Light roast (mild flavor), has more caffeine than manly, dark roast. Just saying. :-D Although, I prefer the flavor of a medium roast to a Sumatra, etc..
-
Just saw a demo online a few days ago, and the "demo guys" were having trouble with some areas with code first, and they were the "experts". So far, I am not entirely convinced that it is a development strategy worth using for the long term. We shall see, I guess.
-
Neither. I prefer to hand create both. Call me old school, but I don't trust auto created databases or entity layers. Too many times someone makes a "minor" tweak to one or the other and then forgets to regenerate, then you're hosed.
-
We are thinking about moving from database first, to code first, with our new projects.
Never liked the code first approach. I'm currently working on a project where it used to be code first, so the database was created by code. (due to external factors we now have database first, but that's to long to explain) Whoever did it messed up royally. - Many to many relationships where there should be one to many. - Tables that just don't make sense. - Overly complicated structures. - Datatypes that just don't make sense. - Missing foreign keys. - ... It's a major pain to work with it now (even with database first) due to those things, unfortunately the database can't be changed anymore so I'm stuck with it (some things I can still fix but most I can't, not without rewriting a major part off the code). About 30% of the tables in that db shouldn't even exist so... If you'r going code first make sure you have a good handle on it because if done wrong it can be a nightmare to work with.
Tom
-
We are thinking about moving from database first, to code first, with our new projects.
-
Spec First, before any of these :-)
Avijnata wrote:
Spec First
That goes without saying.
-
Neither. I prefer to hand create both. Call me old school, but I don't trust auto created databases or entity layers. Too many times someone makes a "minor" tweak to one or the other and then forgets to regenerate, then you're hosed.
-
Never liked the code first approach. I'm currently working on a project where it used to be code first, so the database was created by code. (due to external factors we now have database first, but that's to long to explain) Whoever did it messed up royally. - Many to many relationships where there should be one to many. - Tables that just don't make sense. - Overly complicated structures. - Datatypes that just don't make sense. - Missing foreign keys. - ... It's a major pain to work with it now (even with database first) due to those things, unfortunately the database can't be changed anymore so I'm stuck with it (some things I can still fix but most I can't, not without rewriting a major part off the code). About 30% of the tables in that db shouldn't even exist so... If you'r going code first make sure you have a good handle on it because if done wrong it can be a nightmare to work with.
Tom
Tom Deketelaere wrote:
If you'r going code first make sure you have a good handle on it because if done wrong it can be a nightmare to work with.
This is a real concern for us, as well. Thanks for the feedback.
-
Neither. I prefer to hand create both. Call me old school, but I don't trust auto created databases or entity layers. Too many times someone makes a "minor" tweak to one or the other and then forgets to regenerate, then you're hosed.
I like to roll my own too - if you know what you are doing then it works well.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
-
We are thinking about moving from database first, to code first, with our new projects.
How about being really brave and discarding the relational model altogether[^]? (OK - possibly quite a big leap into the unknown...)
-
Avijnata wrote:
Spec First
That goes without saying.
Slacker007 wrote:
That goes without saying.
Not sure whether this is true. In more than 50 percent of the cases.
-
Slacker007 wrote:
That goes without saying.
Not sure whether this is true. In more than 50 percent of the cases.
Avijnata wrote:
In more than 50 percent of the cases.
You have done statistical analysis on this? :laugh: I have never worked for a software shop that did not require specs. I'm sure they are out there...50% of the time, at least. :) -- just teasing you.
-
We are thinking about moving from database first, to code first, with our new projects.
I'm working on a project right now and we used Code First. There's some nice stuff about it if you keep your database simple, but what database ever ends up being simple, right? Stuff like Migrations can make changes very easy to implement but others a real pain in the ass. If you've got a very small team, like under 5 people, Migrations can be easy to manage. If not, it can be a huge pain. It's probably best to keep the Migrations limited to just a few people on the team until the database is fleshed out. Multiple people putting in migrations on the same table at the same time can make your life miserable. We ran into a couple of problems like this and I'm one of two people working on this project. If you're going to have multiple people doing Migrations coordination of those changes is paramount. I can't stress that enough. If you want to avoid problems, you have to make sure no two people are making changes to the same table at the same time. You REALLY have to understand your data and how relationships work before you even think of starting with Code First. Code First isn't the best when determining how it's going to setup a relationship and you really have to know your DB stuff to make sure it's getting it correct. When Code First doesn't get a relationship correct or exactly the way you want it there is a rather steep learning curve to the syntax to configure it correctly and it only gets steeper if you don't know enough of the detail of how the database side works and the terminology involved. Would I use Code First again? Sure, but not for large projects. I'd keep it to smaller ones only.
A guide to posting questions on CodeProject
Click this: Asking questions is a skill. Seriously, do it.
Dave Kreskowiak -
How about being really brave and discarding the relational model altogether[^]? (OK - possibly quite a big leap into the unknown...)
Interesting. Unfortunately, the world I live in revolves around "what can you give me in a certain time frame?". This does not lend itself well to theoretical software development, or hobby craft, where it may or may not work. Now, after a few years, and it has moved from philosophy into mainstream practice, then I would consider adopting. --> You used the phrase "may free us", in your linked page article, which has a certain level of uncertainty to me, hence the tone of my reply. :)
-
I'm working on a project right now and we used Code First. There's some nice stuff about it if you keep your database simple, but what database ever ends up being simple, right? Stuff like Migrations can make changes very easy to implement but others a real pain in the ass. If you've got a very small team, like under 5 people, Migrations can be easy to manage. If not, it can be a huge pain. It's probably best to keep the Migrations limited to just a few people on the team until the database is fleshed out. Multiple people putting in migrations on the same table at the same time can make your life miserable. We ran into a couple of problems like this and I'm one of two people working on this project. If you're going to have multiple people doing Migrations coordination of those changes is paramount. I can't stress that enough. If you want to avoid problems, you have to make sure no two people are making changes to the same table at the same time. You REALLY have to understand your data and how relationships work before you even think of starting with Code First. Code First isn't the best when determining how it's going to setup a relationship and you really have to know your DB stuff to make sure it's getting it correct. When Code First doesn't get a relationship correct or exactly the way you want it there is a rather steep learning curve to the syntax to configure it correctly and it only gets steeper if you don't know enough of the detail of how the database side works and the terminology involved. Would I use Code First again? Sure, but not for large projects. I'd keep it to smaller ones only.
A guide to posting questions on CodeProject
Click this: Asking questions is a skill. Seriously, do it.
Dave Kreskowiak:thumbsup:
-
Interesting. Unfortunately, the world I live in revolves around "what can you give me in a certain time frame?". This does not lend itself well to theoretical software development, or hobby craft, where it may or may not work. Now, after a few years, and it has moved from philosophy into mainstream practice, then I would consider adopting. --> You used the phrase "may free us", in your linked page article, which has a certain level of uncertainty to me, hence the tone of my reply. :)
Some industries (financial services, mobile phone billing etc.) are already using this model. Unfortunately the code we/they use is very proprietary and this kind of thing is not used in college courses (yet). Commercial offerings do exist - in particular Event Store[^]
-
Just saw a demo online a few days ago, and the "demo guys" were having trouble with some areas with code first, and they were the "experts". So far, I am not entirely convinced that it is a development strategy worth using for the long term. We shall see, I guess.
Slacker007 wrote:
Just saw a demo online a few days ago, and the "demo guys" were having trouble with some areas with code first, and they were the "experts".
Can you share the link?
If the brain were so simple we could understand it, we would be so simple we couldn't. — Lyall Watson
-
We are thinking about moving from database first, to code first, with our new projects.
I like it. Different from DB first, but the automatic db intialization is neat.
"A property doesn't have to be a Property to be a property." - PIEBALDConsult
-
Slacker007 wrote:
Just saw a demo online a few days ago, and the "demo guys" were having trouble with some areas with code first, and they were the "experts".
Can you share the link?
If the brain were so simple we could understand it, we would be so simple we couldn't. — Lyall Watson
My buddy has it. Will post back with it when I get it. I watched part of the vid clip on his machine, not mine.
-
We are thinking about moving from database first, to code first, with our new projects.
