Path: dp-news.maxwell.syr.edu!spool.maxwell.syr.edu!drn.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.comcast.com!news.comcast.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 09 Sep 2004 08:13:55 -0500 Reply-To: "Laconic2" From: "Laconic2" Newsgroups: comp.databases.theory References: <3lmnj0tdqs6n98so05hslbs6b0rjqkkdk7@4ax.com><7dhqj057v2nb3jvgig151psbhl1mg9hrsm@4ax.com><3fsrj0lpe76pfvfjfe1ur2ubpb3hqu69fg@4ax.com> <20040909120732.6c7b769a.felix.klee@inka.de> Subject: Re: How to ensure data consistency? Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2004 09:13:19 -0400 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Message-ID: <8Jadnf6t9M-Oyt3cRVn-gw@comcast.com> Lines: 54 NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.60.68.134 X-Trace: sv3-FDI0Zpbl3QlHGHJ+qKo+BGAgjpw5CQsOmRmQJSeHy/2f5VkJAjYht/GOdLDx2+SR2H7GCkHOn01jw7J!CjSRTgJVoW1vSi4/VCxxUl0D5IrOk5yVGNOR+qVahYL6OXWxUsXuxabpZNyo X-Complaints-To: abuse@comcast.net X-DMCA-Complaints-To: dmca@comcast.net X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.13 Xref: dp-news.maxwell.syr.edu comp.databases.theory:25883 "Felix E. Klee" wrote in message news:20040909120732.6c7b769a.felix.klee@inka.de... > Thus, using Joe Celko's solution, there still is the problem that the > main table may contain entries for which there are no subtables. I'm not trying to be controversial here, but I think Joe Celko's solution and your view of the world are profoundly at odds. While I'd rather let Celko speak for Celko, I can certainly offer my own opinion, and my conviction that Celko's opinion would differ in minor details only. I am convinced that the entire concept of "referential integrity" is at odds with what you want your users to be able to do. It seems to me that you want to accept inputs from users with what amounts to uncontrolled inputs the the "Certificate Type" field. That is, some one comes along, fills out a form, when s/he gets to the Certificate Type field there's a drop down menu, where the last menu entry is "None of the Above". A person comes along and selects "None of the Above" and gets a dialog box where s/he can enter his/her own. The person enters "High School Diploma" , and the entry is accepted! A person comes along and selects "None of the Above" and gets a dialog box where s/he can enter his/her own. The person enters "High Skool Diploma" , and the entry is accepted! Some time later, the data is "cleaned up" meaning that some intelligent administrator (human or artificial) figures out that these two entries are really referring to the same thing, accepts the correct spelling, updates the reference table, and cause both entries to refer to the newly blessed key. I don't think you really want referntial integrity, at least for the initial entries. I don't wish to attack the above as "not legitimate", but I do want to warn you that you are swimming against the stream of over 30 years worth of data management discipline. There are more fish swimming upstream with you than salmon during spawning, so you needn't feel alone. But let me tell you... watch out for the bears, when you make your next jump. Sorry if this whimsical style is outside your culture, but I can only speak as myself.