From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Skorpeo Skorpeo <skorpeo11(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Json table/column design question |
Date: | 2024-05-23 03:50:47 |
Message-ID: | CAKFQuwbDLizRmcrc5=e5AMdsgZ1DrxBNuvrudcrCdeHaOKDPZw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Wednesday, May 22, 2024, Skorpeo Skorpeo <skorpeo11(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was wondering if having unrelated columns in a table is a sound approach
> when using json. In other words, if I have two collections of unrelated
> json objects, for example "Users" and "Inventory", would it be ok to have
> one table with a "Users" column and a "Inventory" column? My concern is
> that from a row perspective the columns could be different lengths, such as
> more inventory items as users. And for any given row the data in one
> column would have no relation to another column. I would only query a
> single column at a time.
>
> Would this approach be ok or are there pitfalls such that it would be
> advantageous/recommended to have a separate table for each column?
>
> Any thoughts/inputs are greatly appreciated.
>
What do you expect to gain? The relational model and normalization has
earned its longevity, I suggest you learn and apply those techniques.
Which generally means avoiding json as a data type. (The single table
abomination you describe isn’t even really on the table - you did a fine
job arguing against it yourself.)
David J.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Muhammad Salahuddin Manzoor | 2024-05-23 04:01:16 | Re: Json table/column design question |
Previous Message | Skorpeo Skorpeo | 2024-05-23 03:38:23 | Json table/column design question |