Re: boolean datatype ... wtf?

On Wed, 29 Sep 2010 05:48:49 -0700 (PDT), Erwin <e.smout_at_myonline.be> wrote:

[snip]

>It is, imo, _NOT_ fundamental in the context of actual database
>design. In fact, I think that the justifiable cases for including a
>BOOLEAN in an actual database design (not talking of derived relvars
>aka views) are few and far between, if existant at all. I think that
>is precisely what VT was talking of: the RM already has a way for
>representing truth information (as the presence/absence of some tuple
>in some relvar with some particular predicate), and as a consequence
>the type BOOLEAN (_WITHIN DATABASE RELVARS_) must be considered
>redundant and unnecessary.

     I do not want the exponential explosion if I have customers with boolean attributes. In my client billing system, there are two: whether the client billing is PDF only and whether they pay by credit card transaction where we process a payment after a delay if we have not heard otherwise.

     Why would I want to split the client table into four tables?

[snip]

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko Received on Fri Oct 01 2010 - 23:29:31 CEST