[Tfug] Trusting DBMS results

[johngalt1]

How much is an answer worth?

more specificity please.

What is the sensitivity of the data?

What is the magnitude of risk and consequence of failure?

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bexley Hall" <bexley401>
To: <tfug at tfug.org>
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2008 10:38 PM
Subject: [Tfug] Trusting DBMS results


> Hi,
>
> I'm *heavily* integrating a DBMS into an application.
> I.e., things that I would often "hard code" in the
> application have been moved into the database.
>
> As a matter of principle, I "never trust inputs".
> (regardless of whether they come from users or
> "sensors", etc.)

If you don't trust your sensors, how can things function?

> But, how pedantic should I treat the data that "I"
> (i.e., my application) has placed in the database?

How pedantic can you get?

> For example, tables that are "written during manufacture"
> (and never altered, in theory, at run time)... should I
> have faith in their sanity?  I.e., should I treat the
> DBMS as a reliable medium?  Or, one that is "suspect"?

It sounds as though you may need to do an experiment for 
yourself to have commensurate trust. Or, do research on 
systems designed for very high reliability.

> Note that I implicitly trust values that I "store" in RAM
> from my computations.  Should the integrity of the DBMS
> be considered on a par with that?  I.e., assume the DBMS
> has mechanisms to detect and repair problems just like
> ECC memory catches alpha particles, etc.

Paper will catch alpha particles. Are your ECC memory dies 
exposed to air?

Unless the goal is philosophical conceptualizing about the 
reliability of generalized DBMSes on virtual hardware, try 
to consider what this query sounds like to the reader and 
modify accordingly.