Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid |
Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: Is the use of VARCHAR(256) as Primary Keys preferred in Oracle?
"Howard J. Rogers" <howardjr2000_at_yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:FYVC9.80802$g9.227327_at_newsfeeds.bigpond.com...
> Whatever happened to Boyce-Codd Normal Form, huh??
>
> Huh?
>
> Come on... TNF is for wimps.
>
> Regards
> HJR
> ;-)
>
>
> "Paul Brewer" <paul_at_paul.brewers.org.uk> wrote in message
> news:3ddc287e_3_at_mk-nntp-1.news.uk.worldonline.com...
> > "Alex Filonov" <afilonov_at_yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:336da121.0211190825.5b10ca51_at_posting.google.com...
> > > I duck under cover, of course. I expect hundreds of people (OK, not
> > hundreds)
> > > start shouting at me that practical means overweght theory, that no
> > production
> > > DB ever was 3rd form compiant etc. All true. And my experience tells
me
> > that
> > > the closer to 3rd form you get, the simpler DB and application code
you
> > can
> > > have.
> > >
> > Alex,
> >
> > No need to duck from me; I agree entirely.
> > But I have no fixed objections to designers departing from TNF for
> > performance, *provided they have got to TNF first*.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Paul
> >
> >
> >
>
Howard,
Have to (yet again) confess ignorance. I am familiar with Uncle Ted's principles, but I have never heard of Mr. Boyce. Is this 4NF and 5NF? (Attribute, Value pairs) and all that stuff? If so, I'd theoretically like the idea of designing the entire application in one table, but I might have a slight concern about how it would eventually perform in the real world <g>
Regards,
Paul
Received on Thu Nov 21 2002 - 14:50:57 CST