Re: Enforcing uniqueness on [real estate/postal] addresses
От | Peter Devoy |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Enforcing uniqueness on [real estate/postal] addresses |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CABoFc_jWOMgKxm7yRTLRO_ZPyNi_L0LhxCvbM2CPGKFt56b88Q@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Enforcing uniqueness on [real estate/postal] addresses ("Peter J. Holzer" <hjp-pgsql@hjp.at>) |
Ответы |
Re: Enforcing uniqueness on [real estate/postal] addresses
Re: Enforcing uniqueness on [real estate/postal] addresses Re: Enforcing uniqueness on [real estate/postal] addresses RE: Enforcing uniqueness on [real estate/postal] addresses Re: Enforcing uniqueness on [real estate/postal] addresses |
Список | pgsql-general |
>Is is possible to have two entries which have the same >address_identifier_general, street and postcode, but different >descriptions? Unfortunately, yes. The data comes from gov't systems to regulate the development/alteration of arbitrary pieces of property and those pieces do not always have a postal address. E.g. a farmer may one year apply to erect a wind turbine in "field north of Foo Cottage" and the next year apply to demolish "barnhouse west of Foo Cottage". Now, I know what you are thinking, there is a normalization opportunity and you may well be right. However, the problem does exist in some of the other fields too and I am already facing a fair amount of join complexity in my schema so I am trying to figure out my options :) >(What is an address_identifier_general, btw?) Address identifier composed by numbers and/or characters. I'm using the terminology from the EU's "INSPIRE Data Specification on Addresses" Guidelines. I haven't yet had the opportunity to try out the above suggestions but I will post again when I have.
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: