Re: Normalization Question

From: pc <toledobythesea_at_oohay.moc>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 23:35:44 GMT
Message-ID: <klgId.15681$Qb.299@edtnps89>

Dawn M. Wolthuis wrote:

> "Leandro Guimarães Faria Corsetti Dutra" <leandro_at_dutra.fastmail.fm> wrote
> in message news:pan.2005.01.21.06.55.35.625887_at_dutra.fastmail.fm...
>

>>Em Fri, 21 Jan 2005 00:19:31 +0100, BG escreveu:
>>
>>
>>>To abide by the rules of normalization, should the phone & date
>>>fields be placed into their own tables?
>>
>>No, but that may be good design anyway as you may want to save
>>more than one telephone of each type, for example.

>
>
> It is such a shame that you have to guess at future cardinality right up
> front when designing a relational structure, eh? Wouldn't it be great if we
> could design at a level where a change in multiplicity, like a change in
> size, type, or constraints, could be handled without a changing the logical
> model of the data? smiles. --dawn
>

in that case, what would be the point of the model?

p Received on Fri Jan 21 2005 - 17:35:44 CST