Date: December 4th, 2008 06:52 am (UTC)From: [identity profile] raingirl26.livejournal.com
While I couldn't read every single part of this - I do have some sort of life outside of the computer - I loved it.

"Perhaps the simplest solution would be to ban marriage outright. Or, better yet, to declare everybody as married to everybody else. But then what would the database engineers do all day?"

Very funny! I personally like the idea of marrying everyone to everyone else - then maybe we would take responsibility for each other. Thanks for sharing.

Date: December 4th, 2008 08:17 am (UTC)From: [personal profile] afuna
afuna: Cat under a blanket. Text: "Cats are just little people with Fur and Fangs" (Default)
You know... I never quite thought about it that way. (And not just the database stuff!)

Date: December 4th, 2008 09:25 am (UTC)From: [identity profile] bluedevi.livejournal.com
Oh man, I am so tempted to use that at school.

Some of my students are a bit homophobic as well. Two birds/one stone.

Date: December 4th, 2008 10:41 pm (UTC)From: [identity profile] damiancugley.livejournal.com
I thought it was odd to end with a solution with person_1 and person_2 fields again. Here’s my suggestion for fully generalized civil unions. First, decree that such a household needs to have a name, agreed by the parties. In conventional marriage in the English-speaking world, the husband’s surname is used, but once you have a rolling union of polyams you may decide to choose a separate name for the marriage itself. Then things are simple enough: there’s a table union_members with a union_id, person_id, plus dates joined and left. This can admittedly represent zero- and one-person unions, but either you ban them at a higher level of business logic, or you accept that a person living on their own or as a sole parent is a marriage of one in some ways—and a zero-member union might be the legal husk of a marriage where all the members have left but the children or other legal obligations live on.

This is horribly similar to a made-up society in an sf story I never wrote.

Date: December 4th, 2008 11:39 pm (UTC)From: [identity profile] twic.myopenid.com (from livejournal.com)
You see, this is exactly the kind of trouble that arises when people try to put databases into heteronormal form.

Luckily, there's been a lot of work on queery optimisation in the last few years.

-- tom

Date: December 5th, 2008 03:46 am (UTC)From: [identity profile] luminairex.livejournal.com
#11 was pretty close to how I would have done it, before reading into the article. That's a great relational database exercise! :)

Date: December 6th, 2008 03:32 pm (UTC)From: [identity profile] elleve.livejournal.com
sharing this everywhere!

(=

Profile

tinyjo: (Default)
Emptied of expectation. Relax.

June 2020

S M T W T F S
 1 23456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
282930    

Most Popular Tags

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated January 16th, 2026 08:14 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios

Style Credit