Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: Which normal form is this violating?

Re: Which normal form is this violating?

From: Joe \ <joe_at_bftsi0.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 09:02:31 -0700
Message-ID: <uciui8o6fu6g9e@corp.supernews.com>


"--CELKO--" <71062.1056_at_compuserve.com> wrote in message <news:c0d87ec0.0204260706.2b886280_at_posting.google.com>...

> INSERT INTO Table_A VALUES (42);
> INSERT INTO Table_B VALUES (42, 13);
> INSERT INTO Table_B VALUES (99, 23);
>
> Is 42 an element of the domain of fieldx? Yes and yes, he said
> redundantly. Is 99 an element of the domain of fieldx? Yes and no, he
> said contradictingly.
>
> >> (Actually, thye have "designed" a number of strange tables, and
> then put views on top of them, to come back to the same one to one
> relationship. Very strange and complex. )<<
>
> OO programmers? I keep seeing meta-data tables from those guys and
> columjn names like "foobar_value_type_id", which mean less than
> nothing.

Perhaps "fieldx" is really "object_id"? Of course, we all know about Pure OOPs and their tendency to treat RDBMS tables as if they were as dumb as flat-files...

--
Joe Foster <mailto:jlfoster%40znet.com>  DC8s in Spaace: <http://www.xenu.net/>
WARNING: I cannot be held responsible for the above        They're   coming  to
because  my cats have  apparently  learned to type.        take me away, ha ha!
Received on Fri Apr 26 2002 - 11:02:31 CDT

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US