Thank you all for reply... I'll organise all comments on articles model in one table because they will be all the same (BLOG, NEWS etc.) but keep others in seperate table.
For what is worth, during college I had subject Databases and Program egineering. My database will be in 3NF in both cases but there is a rule in Program engeneering that says: Group all classes/objects that are same. In other words if you have class ORDER and GUEST_ORDER you should group them because they have same attributes. So, what I relized from this discussion is following: Both approaches are good if you know when to use them :) thanks everyoune On Sep 6, 5:49 pm, villas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Teknoid and Crazy are right about the poor normalisation. > > However, I successfully used the idea once because it was necessary > for me to process all the 'comments' for 5 different models in > datetime order. If I had to go and get the comments from 5 different > tables before I could process them, it would have been a bigger > problem; so, I suppose it depends on what you are doing. However, in > this case, maybe going against the standard normalisation advice > wouldn't be such a good idea if there wasn't a good reason for it. > > If however, luigi7up still wishes to think about his idea, I notice > that Martin Westin's approach for linking addresses to different > models was a little similar in concept and that thread might be worth > a read:http://groups.google.com/group/cake-php/msg/75e6eb68be6b301a?hl=en > > For simply reducing the number of tables, luigi7up could of course > also consider the possibility of having a combined table, for example, > for News and Blog items. He could perhaps call it Articles and > specify whether the article is a News or Blog item with a simple > flag. He would then of course only require one Comments table too. > Of course he wouldn't be doing that if the fields are significantly > different, but I have noticed that some CMS systems successfully > simplify their schemas by combining their content types into as few > tables as possible. > > Best regards. > > On Sep 6, 3:48 pm, teknoid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I see little benefit to this solution, having everything in one table > > is not necessarily a good thing. > > > There are a few drawbacks to this solution... > > > - Relying on two fields in order to establish an association > > - Lack of flexibility. What happens when you decide that Blog comments > > need to have additional fields? > > - Poor normalization > > - Possibly meaningless fields for certain records (i.e. > > blog_comment_vote) for Image comment (which does not require any > > votes) > > > On Sep 6, 5:43 am, luigi7up <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > hola everyone, > > > > while developing application something crossed my mind. What about > > > organizing all comments throughout application in one database table. > > > > What I mean is this: > > > > If application has some kind of Blog, News, picture gallery you woul > > > create blog_comments table, news_comments table etc. > > > What about table creating one table that would hold all comments ?!? > > > Table comments would have following fields (id, model_name, item_id, > > > author, text) > > > > This table would get pretty huge very soon but there is some logic in > > > this approach :) > > > > What do you think? > > > > thanks > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CakePHP" group. To post to this group, send email to cake-php@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cake-php?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
