On Monday 13 March 2006 03:03, Richard Huxton wrote:
> Robert Paulsen wrote:
> > This still requires me to modify the overall database structure but not
> > the original item table. As my reward :) I get to use any type I choose
> > for each new attribute.
>
> The whole point of the database struct
Robert Paulsen wrote:
This still requires me to modify the overall database structure but not the
original item table. As my reward :) I get to use any type I choose for each
new attribute.
The whole point of the database structure is to accurately reflect the
requirements of your data. If yo
On Sunday 12 March 2006 11:29, chester c young wrote:
> --- Robert Paulsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > One problem with the above is that the list of attributes is fixed. I
> > am looking for a way to assign new, previously undefined, attributes
>
> to
>
> > items without changing the table stru
--- Robert Paulsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One problem with the above is that the list of attributes is fixed. I
> am looking for a way to assign new, previously undefined, attributes
to
> items without changing the table structure. Is it ever appropriate to
do
> the following?
> ...
There a
Here is a sample table:
item
item_id int
namechar
attrib1 char
attrib2 char
attrib3 char
One problem with the above is that the list of attributes is fixed. I am
looking for a way to assign new, previously undefined, attributes to items
without changing the table structure
