Re: Database schema for univesal usage
Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 20:48:48 GMT
Message-ID: <QG7ie.3172$uR4.2340_at_newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>
The regulars in this news group have already given a lot of the best answers. I particularly go along with what Kenneth Downs has said.
I also agree that tables and views are logical structures, not physical structures.
I want to look at your question from a different angle.
Why is designing a set of tables that is subject matter specific "painful"? Why isn't it just a straightforward process of figuring out which data values you need to store, grouping values together into attributes, then grouping attributes together into useful relations, then translating the whole thing into tables, rows and columns.
What's so painful about that?
Alternatively, what's so painful about going to www.databaseanswers.com and finding the model that most nearly matches your data need, and then refining a little?
Why would you want all databases to be based on a common schema?
"Chris" <cw23_at_greenmail.ch> wrote in message
news:1115639738.523972.176340_at_z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> Does anyone know about a intentions to build a general database schema
> (based on ER) that can be used for different purposes without changing
> the physical layer (tables, views)?
> Are such ideas described in the literature?
>
> Thanx in advance
>
> Chris
>
Received on Mon May 16 2005 - 22:48:48 CEST