Re: How to normalize this?

From: Jan Hidders <hidders_at_gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 1 May 2013 17:38:17 +0200
Message-ID: <518136e9$0$6366$e4fe514c_at_dreader35.news.xs4all.nl>


On 2013-05-01 13:08:38 +0000, Erwin said:

> Op woensdag 1 mei 2013 11:20:47 UTC+2 schreef Jan Hidders het volgende:

>> On 2013-04-30 22:17:44 +0000, Erwin said:
>> 
>> And I would argue that in practice the different>> components usually 
>> turn out to be independent facts anyway. The fact>> that they have 
>> different underlying dependencies already sort of hints>> at that. But 
>> if you have a realistic example that would show otherwise,>> that would 
>> be interesting.

>
> Not sure if I'm thinking of the same kind of thing as you, but I'm
> thinking of CUSTOMERs that have an AGE, where AGE determines [some kind
> of] COMMERCIAL _CLASS.
>
> AGE and COMMERCIAL_CLASS don't become facts that are "independent" from
> there being a CUSTOMER to begin with.

There we probably differ. It might be that each class was introduced because of certain clients that we had in the past, but that does not logically exclude the possibility that at some point in the future we have for a brief period no clients of that class. In that case we would not want to lose the link between age and that class. So a separate age-class table would be a good design here.

Received on Wed May 01 2013 - 17:38:17 CEST

Original text of this message