Path: news.easynews.com!newsfeed1.easynews.com!easynews.com!easynews!newsfeed.news2me.com!newsfeed-west.nntpserver.com!hub1.meganetnews.com!nntpserver.com!headwall.stanford.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: Wangkhar@yahoo.com (WangKhar) Newsgroups: comp.databases.theory Subject: Re: Table structure dilemma Date: 30 Jan 2003 06:15:22 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 9 Message-ID: References: <87y959u7a5.fsf@tiger.rapttech.com.au> NNTP-Posting-Host: 195.92.113.11 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1043936123 21219 127.0.0.1 (30 Jan 2003 14:15:23 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 30 Jan 2003 14:15:23 GMT Xref: newsfeed1.easynews.com comp.databases.theory:24540 X-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 07:14:42 MST (news.easynews.com) why bother with a rate table? it introduces a level of extremely dubious mess into this. Values/costs are so fluid that this could cause quite big problems. Sure you can do it, but why bother? Would you split Town, county and postcode into seperate tables with a number to cross reference? You could but it would hurt.