As much as I like a nice, normalized database, there have been times where un-normalizing a database is the most effective solution. Of course, I can't think of a good example right now. However, I do insist that the database MUST be normalized to at least 3rd normal form at some point in the development process. The discipline of normalizing the data is the important part. You need to split the data into its optimum records before you can un-normalize it. --Paul E Musselman PaulMmn@ix.netcom.com >Well, of course, Alan. If he has to denormalize it to do it, there is no >good reason to do it. Database files should *always* be normalized. > >Scott didn't mention anything about normalization though. Which is why >I asked the question, better for what? > >Regards, > >Jim Langston > >Alan Campin wrote: > >> Sorry but I disagree strongly. >> >> Your tables should be normalized. If all the attributes(fields) in the table >> is based on the key and nothing but the key, then you know what size your >> record is. The data base normalization tells you what goes in each table. > >[SNIP] +--- | This is the Midrange System Mailing List! | To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com. | To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com. | To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com. | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: firstname.lastname@example.org +---
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.