I've followed this list for quite a long time, and I think that I've
discovered a pattern that I would like to discuss.
It seems like there are two camps considering EAV models. On the one
hand, there are researchers who think that EAV is a great way to meet
their objectives. On the other hand, there are the "business" guys who
thnk that EAV is crap.
I've seen this pattern often enough and consistently enough that I think
there may be an underlying difference of objectives concerning the use
of databases itself that may be responsible for this divergence.
I'm a researcher type, and I've made an EAV model that suits me well in
my genealogy research. How can you associate an essentially unknown
number of sundry "events" to a "person" without an EAV model?
It seems to me that data models made for research is a quite different
animal than data models made for business. In research, we often need to
register data that may be hard to pin down in exactly the right pigeon
hole, but never the less need to be recorded. The most sensible way to
do this, IMO, is frequently to associate the data with some already-
known or postulated entity. That's where the EAV model comes in really
handy.
--
Leif Biberg Kristensen | Registered Linux User #338009
Me And My Database: http://solumslekt.org/blog/
