Re: implications of merging 17 tables into 1...

Comments embedded.
On Jun 26, 1:16 pm, nirav <shiva..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We have a data model and part of the applications' functionality is
> there in a group of 17 tables to 20 inter related tables.

I'm lost, are there 17 tables or 20 tables?

> Now there is
> an initiative to redesign this piece entirely and the architect is
> suggesting just one mega table instead of these 17!

And?

> What could be the
> pros and cons of this approach?

You know more than we do at this point. HOW is this architect proposing to consolidate these tables into one?

>
> Does it mean that there will be more self joins for the same table and
> writing queries for getting required data will be more complex?
>

How should anyone know, given that you haven't explained how these tables are currently defined nor have you provided a layout for this proposed new table?

> What would be the right approach to analyze such a proposal?
>

Provide much more information than you have.

> With thanks,
> Nirav

David Fitzjarrell Received on Tue Jun 26 2007 - 13:43:22 CDT