On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 2:04 PM, Gnanam<gna...@zoniac.com> wrote: > > I also read some article which talks about the type of patterns: > 1. Meta-database > 2. Mutating > 3. Fixed > 4. LOB > > My question here is, what is the best approach to define the architecture > for custom fields. Performance should not be compromised.
The reason there are multiple patterns are because the best approach depends very much on the specifics of your needs. For all David's dogma there are use cases where EAV is the best fit. But there are downsides and if those downsides are a problem then one of the other patterns may be a better fit. -- greg http://mit.edu/~gsstark/resume.pdf -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
