Hi, On 8/28/07, Andrew Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 28, 2007 at 03:37:22PM +0100, Sebastian Ritter wrote: > > Thanks for the information. > > > > Both tables would be exactly sames apart from the foreign key relation > to > > clients or services. > > Hmm. Are the services or clients tables different? A useful rule of > thumb is that, to the extent you can sort things into "kinds of > data", then you should have exactly one space for each one. (I hope > that's clear.)
The table definition is exactly the same. The only difference is whether the row refers to a client or service. > Another factor ive been considering is that one of the fields in this > > table(s) definition(s) is free flowing text which could potentially > become > > very large. Should I take this in to > > consideration when deciding whether to split the tables? In terms of > > searching speed that is. > > I'd put it in its own table, probably, unless you're going to use it > frequently. Why would frequency of use change whether or not I use one or two tables? Sebastian
