Re: Newbie question about db normalization theory: redundant keys OK?
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 23:52:39 +0100
On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 02:57:36 GMT, Brian Selzer wrote:
>"David Cressey" <cressey73_at_verizon.net> wrote in message
>> "Bob Badour" <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
>>> 6NF has at most one non-key attribute.
>> Thanks for the above definition. It's simple, and easily understood. I
>> actually "invented" this form on my own in my head, but didn't think it
>> important enough to merit giving it a name.
>It's also wrong. Consider,
>R(a*,b*,c*) where a*, b* and c* are each keys,
>R is not in 6NF because it can be decomposed into
>even though R doesn't have any non-key attributes!
How should I interpret R(a*, b*, c*)? As a relation with three candidate keys, each over one attribute? Or as a relation with a single candidate key over three attributes?
In the former case, R is indeed not in 6NF as I understand it. I guess
that Bob was thinking about the primary key only when writing down his
explanation for 6NF.
In the latter case, the decomposition is incorrect. R can't be
In the latter case, the decomposition is incorrect. R can't be decomposed.
Best, HugoReceived on Sun Dec 16 2007 - 23:52:39 CET