7 Replies Latest reply on Jun 12, 2014 11:52 PM by PeterWindle

    Looking for your FileMaker Nightmare DBs

    jmedema

      I am needing a few more examples of nightmare databases for one of my DevCon presentations called "Essential Data Modeling: Avoiding the Nightmare...". Can you help?

       

      Specifically, I'm looking for examples of solutions that grew organically in an uncontrolled environment and have resulted in some (or all) of the following:

      • Tables with massive field counts
      • Nightmarish Relationships Graphs
      • Naming Conventions from the Pit
      • Incredibly horribly freakishly complex layouts

       

      Client, developer and system names will be confidential, of course, and aren't needed for the presentation. However, what I DO want is any or all of the following:

      • PDFs or screen shots of the Relationships Graph
      • PDFs or screen shots of Stats of the tables with field counts (Manage Database > Tables)
      • PDfs or screen shots of naming conventions (or lack thereof) gone wild

       

      If (and only if) you approve, I will publicly acknowledge your submission in the presentation at DevCon this year. Not sure if your submissions should be posted here in the forum. Feel free to email them directly to me at jmedema@surefootdata.com. I will post back to this thread the worst of the worst in a few weeks (only those with approval).

       

      Much thanks,

       

      Jim Medema

      Surefoot Database Consulting, Inc

      Certifed Developer v7-12, FBA Trainer v7-12

        • 1. Re: Looking for your FileMaker Nightmare DBs
          jmedema

          I should clarify that I am assuming that any nightmare DBs you submit are ones that you were asked to work on. They were someone else's solution - a nightmare that YOU did not create.

           

          Jim

          • 2. Re: Looking for your FileMaker Nightmare DBs
            gdurniak

            All the solutions I work on were started by the business owner, in FileMaker 3 or 5,  so they are all quite a challenge

             

            Please be sure to point out that FileMaker's Relationship Graph has NO tools, to help sort out the resulting mess

             

            greg

             

             

            > I should clarify that I am assuming that any nightmare DBs you submit are ones that you were asked to work on. They were someone else's solution - a nightmare that YOU did not create.

             

            Jim

            • 3. Re: Looking for your FileMaker Nightmare DBs
              BruceRobertson

              I agree on the lack of tools but also an important lack of meaningful and usable conceptual frameworks.

               

              It seems to me we don't have the language to evaluate, characterize, or solve these problems.

               

              We have seen some wonderful results of conversion and simplified graphs.

              We know things about the dependency tree.

               

              How do we build a path to get from "here" to "there" ?

              • 4. Re: Looking for your FileMaker Nightmare DBs
                jmedema

                Here's one of my examples - have anything similar or worse?

                 

                Nightmare_RG02.png

                • 5. Re: Looking for your FileMaker Nightmare DBs
                  gdurniak

                  Mine are actually simpler

                   

                  A single box in the middle, surrounded by 150 or more Relationships

                   

                  greg

                  • 6. Re: Looking for your FileMaker Nightmare DBs
                    PeterWindle

                    I've been supporting a system that has multiple files (hang over from v6) and some idiot decided to do data separation on the majority of the files...

                     

                    sigh.

                    • 7. Re: Looking for your FileMaker Nightmare DBs
                      PeterWindle

                      Actually... there is one worse example...

                       

                      MANY MANY years ago, I think it was version 4? There was a "hosted" solution on Mac network, which was still on Mac OS 8/9 systems, there where two main issues here:

                       

                      1. They duplicated files and tried to host them as "one" solution

                       

                      2. They "hosted" solution by accessing the files across file sharing (not via FileMaker)

                       

                      3. Files shared where on more than one computer

                       

                      4. The "host" computers where being used for other purposes (users where on them continually)

                       

                      5. Reminder, they where on Mac OS 9, which was not multi-tasking, which meant that anyone using the "host", would simply do something like click a menu and eveyone accessing the file would come to a grinding halt.

                       

                      6. The network was not Ethernet, AppleTalk via phonenet (yes, I am that old)

                       

                      SUMMARY: Most of the computers where slow, the network was slow, the network traffic was chaos, the files where not being shared properly and not consolodated and NOT centralised and the OS did not allow multiple users working on the one file at the one time... wow. I was amazed they got any work done. ahhh, the good old days.