Re: design question

"stu" <smcgouga_at_nospam.co.uk> wrote in message news:b0jt6e$fe1$1$8302bc10_at_news.demon.co.uk...
> At least this is what I think is a correct way to model super-sub type
> relations. Again if somebody knows better please tell me im talking crap!

Your description fits with my understanding of how you would do it, although I tend to agree with Heinz in that you don't necessarily need the composite primary. I must admit, my work has required me to consider the subtyping option in my database designs, but I was always afraid of the complexity/exra work it would introduce. Has anyone worked with this? Is it generally practical? For example, lets say you were asked to build the Student/Teacher solution - would you go with subtyping, or would you denormalise the design so both concepts are represented by one entity (table)? If you went with the subtyping, would you then create views to present a simplified view into the data such as a Teachers view and a Students view?

Any thoughs / experiences welcome!

Tobin

> cheers
> Stu
>
>
Received on Thu Jan 23 2003 - 18:20:52 CET