Re: Lookup tables

From: "Peter J(dot) Holzer" <hjp-pgsql(at)hjp(dot)at>
To: pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Lookup tables
Date: 2025-02-06 21:03:18
Message-ID: 20250206210318.kj2j5dvliidpmesy@hjp.at
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgadmin-support pgsql-general

On 2025-02-04 22:41:38 +0100, Thiemo Kellner wrote:
> 04.02.2025 18:31:09 Michał Kłeczek <michal(at)kleczek(dot)org>:
>
> >
> >> On 4 Feb 2025, at 18:27, Thiemo Kellner <thiemo(at)gelassene-pferde(dot)biz> wrote:
> >>
> >>  Unless the lookup table is actually a check constraint one
> >> can use to populate dropdown boxes in an interface.
> >
> > That is even worse because it ceases being transactional and users
> > might select something different than what they see on the screen.
>
> I might see what you want to point out. E.g. the table is COLOURS. The
> rec with id 1 is RED, the one with id 2 is BLUE, 3 is GREE and so on.
> Now you load these values into the dropdown box that sports RED, BLUE,
> GREE and so on. While someone selects GREE, there is a maintenance
> release changing GREE to YELLOW. So when that someone sends the
> selection by id to the backend, not GREE is selected but YELLOW.

I fail to see why use of a surrogate key is the problem here.

Either changing the color from GREE to YELLOW makes sense or it doesn't.

If it doesn't make sense, then it's release which is faulty, not the
model.

if it does make sense (I'm a bit at a loss when that might be the case,
maybe the "color" is just a code word, or maybe they are colors in a
design which are arbitrary but must be consistent), then the experience
that the user has is exactly the same as if the maintenance release was
applied just after they selected the color. Which might be a bit
confusing but is almost certainly what is wanted.

> A) Your release changed the sementics of the record 3. It's meaning
> changed. I cannot recommend doing that.

If the release changed the semantics of an existing record the release
was almost certainly wrong.

> B) If you absolutely must change the semantic, put your application
> into maintenance mode in which noone can select anything beforehand.
>
> If the maintenance would just correct the typo from GREE to GREEN,
> nothing would happen. Yor customer still ordered the lavishly green
> E-Bike her hear ever desired.

Yeah, that's a good example where changing the color from GREE to YELLOW
doesn't make sense. Presumably that ID 3 is used as a foreign key in
lots of places, e,g. in an inventory table. Your bikes in stock won't
just magically change color just because you changed some text in the
database. So that change simply doesn't make sense and shouldn't be done
as part of a maintenance release. Confusing a few people who just happen
to open the dropdown in the wrong second is the least of your problems.

hp

--
_ | Peter J. Holzer | Story must make more sense than reality.
|_|_) | |
| | | hjp(at)hjp(dot)at | -- Charles Stross, "Creative writing
__/ | http://www.hjp.at/ | challenge!"

In response to

Responses

Browse pgadmin-support by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Yogesh Mahajan 2025-02-07 05:52:22 Re: Issue running pgAdmin behind a reserve proxy
Previous Message Eamon Doyle 2025-02-06 19:26:58 Issue running pgAdmin behind a reserve proxy

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2025-02-06 21:05:02 Re: Using Expanded Objects other than Arrays from plpgsql
Previous Message Robert Leach 2025-02-06 20:08:26 Re: How to perform a long running dry run transaction without blocking