List:General Discussion« Previous MessageNext Message »
From:metastable Date:November 14 2008 4:07pm
Subject:Re: normalised designs: customer database
View as plain text  
Mr. Shawn H. Corey wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-11-14 at 14:30 +0000, Mark Goodge wrote:
>   
>> I wouldn't try to arbitrarily normalise the database for SQL
>> efficiency. 
>> In a real-life situation, it's more important that the database
>> design 
>> reflects your actual workflow and business requirements. Having a
>> field 
>> that's empty 50% or more of the time is far less of a problem than
>> not 
>> being able to process a sale because your database structure is too 
>> inflexible :-)
>>     
>
> I agree.  Remember hardware is cheap, software expensive.  It's always
> cheaper to add more hard disks than it is to create the software to deal
> with an inflexible design.
>
>
>   
Thank you both for your comments.

I agree that reality will eventually force me to settle for the
hardware-, not software-expensive solution.

It was more of a theoretical question. I've been researching this on and
off for quite some time now, and have never found a definitive resource
for solving this kind of problem.
Apparently, not ever everyone lies awake of these kinds of things :)

In addition: I believe in the ultimate flexibility of fully normalised
design over a solution that is cheaper to implement. The latter may work
for a long time, but if/when the day comes that your requirements change
or hacks need to be applied, I would think that a normalised database
will allow you to upgrade the design much more easily than a
non-normalised one.


Stijn
Thread
normalised designs: customer databasemetastable14 Nov
  • Re: normalised designs: customer databaseMark Goodge14 Nov
    • Re: normalised designs: customer databaseMr. Shawn H. Corey14 Nov
      • Re: normalised designs: customer databasemetastable14 Nov
  • RE: normalised designs: customer databaseJerry Schwartz14 Nov
  • Re: normalised designs: customer databaseJujitsu Lizard14 Nov
  • Re: normalised designs: customer databaseMartijn Tonies14 Nov
    • RE: normalised designs: customer databaseUS Data Export14 Nov
      • Re: normalised designs: customer databasemetastable14 Nov
  • Re: normalised designs: customer databaseMartijn Tonies14 Nov
    • Re: normalised designs: customer databaseJujitsu Lizard14 Nov
      • Re: normalised designs: customer databasePeter Brawley14 Nov
  • Re: normalised designs: customer databaseMartijn Tonies14 Nov
  • Re: normalised designs: customer databaseMartijn Tonies14 Nov
  • Re: normalised designs: customer databaseMartijn Tonies14 Nov
    • Re: normalised designs: customer databaseJujitsu Lizard14 Nov
      • Re: normalised designs: customer databasemetastable14 Nov
    • Re: normalised designs: customer databasemetastable15 Nov
      • Re: normalised designs: customer databaseJujitsu Lizard15 Nov
        • Re: normalised designs: customer databasemetastable16 Nov
          • RE: normalised designs: customer databaseJerry Schwartz17 Nov
            • Re: normalised designs: customer databasemetastable17 Nov
  • Re: normalised designs: customer databaseBill newton14 Nov
  • Re: normalised designs: customer databaseMartijn Tonies17 Nov
  • Re: normalised designs: customer databaseMartijn Tonies17 Nov
  • Re: normalised designs: customer databaseMartijn Tonies17 Nov
    • RE: normalised designs: customer databaseUS Data Export17 Nov
  • Re: normalised designs: customer databaseMartijn Tonies17 Nov