Re: Design question regarding data typing
- From: "Jacob JKW" <jacobcdf@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 24 Feb 2006 06:56:47 -0800
Bob Hairgrove wrote:
It does sound like an awkward design to me. For example, both schoolsThis is what I'm already doing.
and banks have a physical address, or location, as well as one or more
mailing addresses and a variety of phone and fax numbers, e-mail, etc.
So do ordinary people. And there might some day be an additional new
entity with the same attributes. Therefore, I would keep the address
and phone data, etc. in separate tables.
If you are more interested in modelling a map with longitude andAgain, this is what I'm doing. It's just that I call my table
latitude, perhaps modelling the physical property (i.e. real estate),
then you would typically try to abstract the schools and banks as
specializations of a base type, perhaps "building". The usual way of
modelling this would be to have a table of buildings, schools and
banks. The schools and banks tables would have a 1-to-1 foreign
constraint on the primary keys, e.g.:
"Institutions" instead of "Buildings".
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Design question regarding data typing
- From: Bob Hairgrove
- Re: Design question regarding data typing
- References:
- Design question regarding data typing
- From: Jacob JKW
- Re: Design question regarding data typing
- From: Bob Hairgrove
- Design question regarding data typing
- Prev by Date: Re: Design question regarding data typing
- Next by Date: Sad, but true ... (???)
- Previous by thread: Re: Design question regarding data typing
- Next by thread: Re: Design question regarding data typing
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|