On Monday 02 June 2003 05:56, Dani Oderbolz wrote:
> Josh Berkus wrote:
> >FWIW, I primarily develop business/accounting applications, and
> > have to say that arrays as a data type have no place in
> > business/financial applications in permanent tables. I have yet
> > to see a case in such an application where a child table was not
> > more appropriate than an array.
>
> Hi,
> I completely agree with Josh.
> Its much easier to query another table then to fiddle the data out
> of the Array.
> For me, arrays make sense only in some special cases, in all others
> its like a violation of the relational paradigma.
Well bro, I don't really know who is completely right other than go
with the Josh POV because of his experience.
But I can see the validity of both points of view on the matter.
Again, still developing with a limited set of data and less than zero
experience, what is the overhead cost in processing response when one
uses another table vs doing the bit fiddle with a table array?
I presume when the use of foreign keys and logical indexes are used to
link an external table for the array that the ease and clarity of
coding would outweigh the potential gain in processing speed derived
with maintaining the array within the host table.
YMMV...
--Herbie
