Re: Normalized Tables & SELECT [was: Find "smallest common year"]
От | Stefan Schwarzer |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Normalized Tables & SELECT [was: Find "smallest common year"] |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 618997C9-A5A5-4491-9A8A-A4B018AD8A1B@grid.unep.ch обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Normalized Tables & SELECT [was: Find "smallest common year"] (Stefan Schwarzer <stefan.schwarzer@grid.unep.ch>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
>> I find it far easier to maintain normalized tables that produced >> non-normalized ones (for things like data warehousing) than it is to >> maintain non-normalized tables and trying to produce normalized data >> from that. > > Ok, I do understand that. > > So, instead of the earlier mentioned database design, I would have > something like this: > > - one table for the country names/ids/etc. (Afghanistan, 1; > Albania, 2....) > - one table for the variable names/ids/etc. (GDP, 1; Population, > 2; Fish Catch, 3;....) > - one table for the years names/ids/etc. (1970, 1; 1971, 2; > 1973, 3; ....) > and > - one table for all "statistical data" with four fields - > id_variable, id_country, id_year, and the actual value > > You say > >> I find it far easier to maintain normalized tables that produced >> non-normalized ones (for things like data warehousing) than it is to >> maintain non-normalized tables and trying to produce normalized data >> from that. What is your view about (having 500 different variables/data sets) using a single table for all data versus one table for each variable. In terms of "readability" I guess the second solution would be better. But, then,.... I don't know... Thanks for any views.... Stef
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: