Thingy is great but to be 100% useful as a full relational database we need the option of having unique fields, keys and indexes.
Ehab Heikal
www.elmotaheda.com , www.mashy.com
Quote: An eye for an Eye only helps make the whole world blind
Gandhi
First and foremost Thingy is not a relational database. It is an application builder. But more to your point, I need more than what you've posted here. I need real world examples of how you intend to use each feature. And please create separate RFE's for each feature you want added. What you've posted so far is just a commentary, not a request for a specific feature. That's not useful.
As an example of unique fields, i was trying a while back to make a mini application for real estate appartment selling. The appartment numbers are unique, you can not have two appartments labeled 203. This is a feature of the field itself as being a primary key. Maybe i should have said primary keys instead of unique fields.
Yes thingy is an application builder, but as far as I understand it is working on top of a relational database, the more control you give the more useful it will be for more advanced users.
As for indexing, well it is not as important, it is a speed thing and if it is needed it can always be done at the database optimization level.
In your blog you did refer to thingy as micro$oft Access like, which is a database with an IDE. So I assumed thingy will try to fill the IDE part for mysql databases running on WebGUI.
I said some people will associate it with MS Access, and yes it does sit on top of a database, but I really don't want people to think of it as a database tool. That's why we didn't use any database terminology in building it.
The unique fields thing seems like a decent idea. I can definitely see someone using it as you described. Unique field is a good term for it, because it won't be the primary key (there's an id that is the primary key) and we aren't using database terminology. The reason I questioned it was that I just wanted to see what the real world application for it was, and you gave a great example.
I know you dream of a tool that non-tech people can use to build applications, the goal is a tough one. I believe you are on the right track to giving less technically oriented people some power, but if you pass through more of the features of databases to the end user then more technically oriented people would be able to make wonders with this in much less time than any other web based content management system. And that would get the developer crown in. I personally would kill ( well not really ) for a query builder with wizards like M$ Access that can be used with forms like thingy.
This is my 2 cents worth. I hope that this is not the wrong place to post this.
Back to my original point, Unique fields. How much karma do you think would make this come through?
