Re: 2 versions of an entity worth distinct table?
От | Chris Browne |
---|---|
Тема | Re: 2 versions of an entity worth distinct table? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 871v4z2hob.fsf@cbbrowne.afilias-int.info обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | 2 versions of an entity worth distinct table? (gvim <gvimrc@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
gvimrc@gmail.com (gvim) writes: > If a table representing contact details can have 2 but no more than 2 email addresses is it really worth factoring-outemail addresses to a separate table. Technically it's a 1-to-many relationship so should be done this way butwhat is the general practice out there in such "max. 2" situations? Keeping them as: > > Primary Email > Secondary Email > > .... also preserves priority though not strictly normalised, I know. I'd be inclined to normalize this, as it's: a) difficult to guarantee that it will only ever be 2. b) mighty nice to be able to attach validation rules to ONE simple email table, rather than having to put them on several columns possibly spread across more tables. -- wm(X,Y):-write(X),write('@'),write(Y). wm('cbbrowne','gmail.com'). http://linuxfinances.info/info/internet.html If nothing ever sticks to Teflon, how do they make Teflon stick to the pan?
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: