More information about the Underscore mailing list

[_] database design

Karl McClelland karlspringfield at googlemail.com
Thu Nov 30 14:28:33 GMT 2006

Thanks very much.

I've tinkered with MS Access in my last role as their main system was built
around that with a central stored database on one of the servers.

So I'm building it in the same sort of way only using filemaker which is
relatively similar. There is also a way to share it, but I'll have to look
into that at a later stage.

Probably a good idea to look at some of the old db schemas. and learn from
them.

Ideally, I'd like others to be able to access it.

Just having a look at this Sugar thing, not heard about it before. Looks
quite interesting although I doubt I'm in a position to start taking on
something new.

What did you mean with 'object' ?

Thanks again,


Karl

On 11/30/06, Alex Stanhope <listalex at lightenna.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > Should existing fields such as 'industry_type' (financial, marketing,
> > development, etc.)
> >
>
> Depends on whether they're closed miniworld or open miniworld (likely to
> get
> more values).  Generally I assume something like 'industry_type' would be
> open, so I'd recommend a single ENUM *unless* it can be multivalued: e.g.
> =
> financial and marketing, development and financial.  If it is multivalued,
> yes it'll need to be a separate relation with a foreign key import.
>
> >
> > even 'title' (Mr., Mrs, etc.) should that be in a separate db ?
> >
>
> 'title' is definitely not multivalued (a single entity/tuple can't be Miss
> and Mr), so safe to ENUM.
>
> > if so, then litterally tonnes of the flat fields can turn into new
> related
> > dbs.
> >
> > Thanks for a thumbs up or down....
> >
> > Karl
> >
>
> Relational databases thumbs up - at least until we all go 'object'
> Cheers, Alex
>
>
> --
> underscore_ list info/archive -> http://www.under-score.org.uk
>



-- 
Karl

T.        01761 410 704
M.       07738 714616