Jerry Schwartz wrote:
If all you want to do is to restrict a field to certain values, and aren't
concerned with cascading operations, is a set more efficient than a foreign
key?
Regards,
Jerry Schwartz
The Infoshop by Global Information Incorporated
195 Farmington Ave.
Farmington, CT
Jujitsu Lizard wrote:
On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 3:54 AM, metastable [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I may just have had an insight over my morning coffee.
How about turning things around and adding a FK -to the customers table-
on each of the customer type tables (companies, people
Martijn Tonies wrote:
The notion of a variant record exists in many programming languages.
Typically you have a selector to indicate which variant it is. There is
nothing at all wrong with using the same sort of construct in a database
table.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variant_record
regards,
Stijn
-- metastable Stijn Verholen Camille Huysmanslaan 114, bus 2 B-2020
ANTWERPEN +32 (0)3 707 08 08 (phone) +32 (0)3 707 06 06 (fax) +32 (0)473
47 62 88 (mobile) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.metastable.be BTW-BE
0873.645.643 bankrek.nr. ING 363-0106543-77
--
MySQL General Mailing
US Data Export wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Martijn Tonies [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 10:44 AM
To: 'mysql'
Subject: Re: normalised designs: customer database
3) create the customer table with a FK for people and a FK for
companies, and decide
Mr. Shawn H. Corey wrote:
On Fri, 2008-11-14 at 14:30 +, Mark Goodge wrote:
I wouldn't try to arbitrarily normalise the database for SQL
efficiency.
In a real-life situation, it's more important that the database
design
reflects your actual workflow and business requirements.
Jujitsu Lizard wrote:
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 1:39 PM, Martijn Tonies [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
The notion of a variant record exists in many programming languages.
Typically you have a selector to indicate which variant it is. There is
nothing at all wrong with using the same sort of
Dan O'Keefe wrote:
How do you escape a dash in a table name such as temp-08-08-28?
Thanks,
Dan
How about `tablename` ?
hth,
Stijn
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Waynn Lue wrote:
I have two tables, Applications and Settings. Here are the two schemas:
mysql desc Applications;
+-+-+--+-+-++
| Field | Type| Null | Key | Default |
Extra |
Ananda Kumar wrote:
I feel creating the third table would just be duplicating the data and
occupying space. Creating index on existing table and quering would be
better. But you got a good point of FOREIGN KEY CONSTRAINT. Can we use this
constraint on current SETTINGS table, rather than creating
10 matches
Mail list logo
