From: | Alban Hertroys <dalroi(at)solfertje(dot)student(dot)utwente(dot)nl> |
---|---|
To: | Conrad Lender <crlender(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Code tables, conditional foreign keys? |
Date: | 2009-05-23 10:05:51 |
Message-ID: | B3EC5FD6-ABD0-4724-AA9A-93858AF89969@solfertje.student.utwente.nl |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
> Here's an example of the value groups that were contained in the
> table:
>
> fax status:
> pending, active, sent, error
> department:
> office, accounting, it, legal, experts
> deadline type:
> official, unofficial
> ...
> Is it really advisable to put all these values into 70 separate tables
> with the exact same layout? I don't quite see the benefit.
You could use the ENUM type for that (http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/datatype-enum.html
), although that works best if these values are really static. If
users should be able to edit them they're probably not the best choice.
Alban Hertroys
--
If you can't see the forest for the trees,
cut the trees and you'll see there is no forest.
!DSPAM:737,4a17ca8210091499713462!
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Leif B. Kristensen | 2009-05-23 10:22:24 | Re: Asssociative Arrays: Best practices / snippets? |
Previous Message | Alban Hertroys | 2009-05-23 09:45:00 | Re: performance tuning on Vista problem |