Re: Database design question - Isolated, unrelated tables

Tim <tim_rogers01_at_hotmail.com> wrote:

> In general terms it is quite acceptable to have a standalone table
> with no FK relationships instansiated.
> Indeed, in times gone by whole databases were created in this manner
> as the overhead for OLTP with all the index data manipulation behind
> the scences could bring a system to its knees. (PK & FK are backed by
> 'hidden' indexes).

The only thing that will bring a system to its knees faster than having indexes and FKs is *_not_* having indexes and FKs.

They are purely and simply a nightmare.

<auditing>  

> I would not recommend the above for busy tables.

And there's a point to auditing tables that are relatively static - normally lookups?

Paul...

> Hope that helps, Tim

-- 

plinehan __at__ yahoo __dot__ __com__

XP Pro, SP 2, 

Oracle, 10.2.0.1 (Express Edition)
Interbase 6.0.2.0;

When asking database related questions, please give other posters 
some clues, like operating system, version of db being used and DDL.
The exact text and/or number of error messages is useful (!= "it didn't work!").
Thanks.
 
Furthermore, as a courtesy to those who spend 
time analysing and attempting to help, please 
do not top post.