Re: Rookie asks about "Normalization"

"ideal" in that context is really a theoretical ideal, not a practical one.

normalization can equal the elimination of redundancy.

if you eliminate all redundancy, you have a theoretically pure algebraic model of data and relationships, but in reality this is never desired since you are likely trading off, or bending over backward to get the pure model which results in excess "table joins". when you join a lot of tables you reduce performance. so, you often tradeoff redundancy for performance, and sometimes you even tradeoff storage for performance, performance is the tactile feel the user gets when traversing your schema, so try to make it as slippery as possible.

--

In article <sk952-0512950549410001_at_dffl5-10.gate.net>, sk952_at_gate.net (sam
kern) wrote:



> I have been working on a Computerized Maintenance Management Application that

> has been developed by the RJN Group From Chicago.

> Our Newly Formed MIS Division is pushing to scrap this application for one

> of their own design, with their major complant being that the plant

> program is not

> "normalized".

> Could anyone explain this concept,RJN says that a completely normalized app.

> would be Ideal but is not always the best; I would appreciate any

> info!

> Thanks Ahead of Time


> Sam