Re: The problem with denormalization.

In message <1096367125.055253.224010_at_k17g2000odb.googlegroups.com>, Tony Andrews <andrewst_at_onetel.com> writes
>Laconic2 wrote:
>> "Craig Alexander Morrison" <reply_at_newsgroups.com> wrote in message
>> news:41582599_at_212.67.96.135...
>> > One wonders if people do not know how to normalise data within the
>problem
>> > domain.
>> [snip]
>> > Usually people "denormalise" because they have attempted to
>normalise the
>> > real world for use in a business system.
>> >
>> Mostly as an accident of my own learning curve, I tend not to worry
>about
>> normalization in the problem domain.
>
>Nor me: normalisation is formalised common sense. My table designs
>just ARE normalised, without me having to apply any normalisation
>algorithms.

Some years ago I was involved in the design of a CASE tool. We could have designed in stepwise progressions through first, second, third normal forms. The analysts just wanted one step.

-- 
Bernard Peek
London, UK. DBA, Manager, Trainer & Author. Will work for money.