A storage tank might be better modeled as an asset that is located in a facility rather than being a facility itself.
BTW, we already have a UOM field to go along with the "squareFootage" field (which is unfortunate that it was done that way, but it's been there for a while now). This isn't a change in primary key or anything that requires significant migration, and in fact is just expanding the field size (specifically the decimal size of the numeric field). Most existing databases won't have to do any migration at all unless they want to start storing decimal values instead of just integer values in this field. -David On Mar 30, 2010, at 9:28 AM, Adrian Crum wrote: > Good idea Scott! Taking it one step further, how about supporting volume too? > A facility might be a storage tank. > > -Adrian > > Scott Gray wrote: >> If we want it to be a bit more generic we should probably add two new >> fields: floorArea and floorAreaUomId and then deprecate squareFootage, >> perhaps with a migration service to populate the new fields with the data >> from the old. >> Regards >> Scott >> HotWax Media >> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com >> On 30/03/2010, at 7:22 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I'd like to allow Facility.squareFootage to support decimals. In order to >>> do that, I need to change the type of the squareFootage field from numeric >>> to fixed-point. I can't see any issues doing that OOTB. But in case this >>> would be a problem for someone I prefer to warn. >>> >>> Jacques
