On Fri, 2003-08-01 at 12:44, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Francisco,
>
> > Yes all fields belong to the same entity. I used 100 as an example it may
> > be something like 60 to 80 fields (there are two tables in question). I
> > don't formally do 3rd normal form, but for the most part I do most of
> > the general concepts of normalization.
> >
> > > If not, then good design says to split the table.
>
> Actually, no, it doesn't. If all 60-80 fields are unitary and required
> characteristics of the row-entity, normalization says keep them in one table.
You snipped out too much, because that's exactly what I said...
Another way of writing it: only split the table if some of the fields
are not unitary to the entity.
> The only time NF would recommend splitting the table is for fields which are
> frequenly NULL for reasons other than missing data entry. For those, you'd
> create a child table. Although while this is good 4NF, it's impractical in
> PostgreSQL, where queries with several LEFT OUTER JOINs tend to be very slow
> indeed.
Good to know.
> My attitude toward these normalization vs. performance issues is consistenly
> the same: First, verify that you have a problem. That is, build the
> database with everything in one table (or with child tables for Nullable
> fields, as above) and try to run your application. If performance is
> appalling, *then* take denormalization steps to improve it.
The OP was not talking about denormalizing ...
It was: will vertically partitioning a table increase performance.
And the answer is "sometimes",
--
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
| Ron Johnson, Jr. Home: ron.l.johnson@cox.net |
| Jefferson, LA USA |
| |
| "I'm not a vegetarian because I love animals, I'm a vegetarian |
| because I hate vegetables!" |
| unknown |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
