What they are saying is that the field is always present in the domain model but we don't have the information to backfill it. For example, say you have a customers table. Originally, it just stored their name and internal ID. But now you are adding in their government ID as well. Except that you already have thousands of customers and you don't have their government ID. So you either make the column nullable and slowly backfill it over time. Or you find some default value which isn't null but the code understands it to still be empty. And again, you slowly backfill over time.

▲

nlitened 13 hours ago | parent [-]

> So you either make the column nullable and slowly backfill it over time. Or you find some default value which isn't null but the code understands it to still be empty. And again, you slowly backfill over time.

What would be the justification for using some other “default value” in this case? That’s just null with extra steps. Null _is_ the default value

There’s nothing gross or unholy about null values. Very smart people many years ago envisioned them as part of relational databases specifically for the use cases like these.

	▲	mort96 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I want to represent that a field should never get new null values, it should be treated as non-nullable for the purpose of writing; however there are historical records which were made before the introduction of the field, so it should be treated as nullable for the purpose of reading.