Re: Database Design Best Practice help

From: Andrew Kerber <andrew.kerber_at_gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 09:14:48 -0600
Message-ID: <CAJvnOJa8rzfSMNQeiLsLyimOZGM+HukrmqHm4CwDabjJzGB5=Q_at_mail.gmail.com>

As others have noted, this is a common problem. I have had some success creating such a reference table a couple of times, the key is making sure that all new tables go through a review process in which standards are enforced. The code/value concept is common to almost all applications, and I have had to enforce company standards that put such information on a single table. Several times I have had to go to my boss and above to point out that new applications do not need a new table for the old concept, they need to use the existing structure. If you can create and enforce a code/value single table, it is worth the effort, but as others have noted it can be a difficult fight to win.
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 9:02 AM, mike boligan <mboligan_at_yahoo.com> wrote:

> Jose,
> You have gotten alot of good responses. While these responses can
> help you through your immediate question, something that may help you
> longer term would be to read the book "The Art Of SQL" by Stephane
> Faroult. It answers exactly this question and many others like it. I
> highly recommend it.
>
> Also, I would like to point out, I do not know nor have I ever met
> Stephane.
>
> Mike
>
> --- On Mon, 1/28/13, Jose Soares <jose.soares_at_sferacarta.com> wrote:
>
> From: Jose Soares <jose.soares_at_sferacarta.com>
> Subject: Database Design Best Practice help
> To: oracle-l_at_freelists.org
> Date: Monday, January 28, 2013, 4:03 AM
>
> Hi all,
>
> I have a question about database design best pratice.
>
> In my db I have about one hundred tables like this:
>
> code
> description
>
> To avoid to have a so great number of similar tables in the db
> I wonder if it is a good idea to unify all these tables in one big table
> like this:
>
> id
> code
> table_ name
> description
>
> The advantages are:
>
> 1. only one table in the db instead of 100
> 2. only one controller to manage the table
>
> Could this be a way to enhance db performance?
> Is there any negative point that I don't see?
>
> Thanks for any comments.
>
> j
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
>
>
>
> --
> http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
>
>
>

-- 
Andrew W. Kerber

'If at first you dont succeed, dont take up skydiving.'


--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l

Received on Mon Jan 28 2013 - 16:14:48 CET