Re: Sotirng data in row versus storing the same in column

From: Paul G. Brown <paul_geoffrey_brown_at_yahoo.com>
Date: 17 May 2002 10:12:49 -0700
Message-ID: <57da7b56.0205170912.5bb717e4@posting.google.com>

71062.1056_at_compuserve.com (--CELKO--) wrote in message news:<c0d87ec0.0205161250.295a5a6f_at_posting.google.com>...
> >> I will be creating a table with 2 columns containing name of the
> colmn and the other containing value of this column. <<
>
> Don't do this!! It will not work.
>
> Why are so many new programmers trying to write a schema this way? I
> need to write an article about this ...

   Three letters: XML.

   <foo>

     <bar>this</bar>
     <mug>is</mug>
     <wump>an</wump>
     <ech>elegant</ech>
     <urp>datamodel?</urp>
     <not>NOT!</not>

    </foo>

   =>

      +-------+---------+------------+
      | Seq#  |   Tag   |     Value  |
      +-------+---------+------------+
      |    1  |     foo |     OPEN   |
      |    2  |     bar |     this   |
      |    3  |     mug |       is   |
      |    4  |    wump |       an   |
      |    5  |     ech |    elegant |
      |    6  |     urp | datamodel? |
      |    7  |     not |       NOT! |
      |    8  |     foo |      CLOSE |
      +-------+---------+------------+ 

     Don't know much about schema design,
       but at XML-One, we had a really good time.
     Don't know much about anomalies.
       Why can't my data just be free,
      to be as unstructured as the bird and the bees?
        Ooh, watch the parser bring the server to its knees!
     But I know if I could just XML
        (and these SQL troglydytes would all go to hell)
       what a wonderful world it would be!

      It also explains the resurgent interest in how to manage hierarchies 

   in RDBMS systems. Received on Fri May 17 2002 - 12:12:49 CDT