Re: Dreaming About Redesigning SQL

From: Lauri Pietarinen <lauri.pietarinen_at_atbusiness.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2003 01:11:49 +0200
Message-ID: <bnhkeh$i3t$2@nyytiset.pp.htv.fi>

Anthony W. Youngman wrote:

>In article <$xpsVWAvnCn$Ew5r_at_thewolery.demon.co.uk>, Anthony W. Youngman
><thewolery_at_nospam.demon.co.uk> writes
>
>
>>>Really, however you calculate it, it is an order of magnitude less
>>>than your alternative.
>>>
>>>And please don't tell me that using indexes is not fair or not in the
>>>spirit of the
>>>relational model ;-)
>>>
>>>
>>Well, it does result in data being stored multiple times ;-)
>>
>>And while it maybe doesn't affect the result that much, you wanted the
>>value? Where has that come from? What if the price changed half way
>>through the period you're calculating? :-) You've failed to answer your
>>own question, so maybe I could match you ...
>>
>>
>
>Whoops - sorry - I did notice after I wrote this that you included price
>in your index.
>

OK!

> But it does seem strange indexing on a composite field
>like that ...
>

But why does it seem strange?

regards,
Lauri Received on Sun Oct 26 2003 - 17:11:49 CST