Re: Database schema for "custom fields" - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Shaheed Haque
Subject Re: Database schema for "custom fields"
Date
Msg-id CAHAc2jctwXdZfavXUKOnLneZzw6MVZmhLst4rYEV0XAmOvLKyQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Database schema for "custom fields"  (Matthias Leisi <matthias@leisi.net>)
List pgsql-general

The relational purists will gave their concerns, but especially given what you described about your performance and volumetrics, there is a reason why JSON(b) is a thing. For type checking, and more, I've had success a multi-key approach so that one entry might comprise:

- A "name"
- A "type"
- A "value"

Of course you can add more as needed.

On Tue, 10 Sep 2024, 10:11 Peter J. Holzer, <hjp-pgsql@hjp.at> wrote:
On 2024-09-10 12:08:14 +0500, Muhammad Usman Khan wrote:
> There is not a properly defined solution but you can try the
> Entity-Attribute-Value (EAV) Model. This is an alternative approach, where a
> separate table is used to store custom fields as attributes for each record.
> New fields can be added without altering the schema. There will be no need for
> DDL changes. There might be some cons as you might need multiple joins to
> retrieve all fields for a given record.

I think this is essentially Matthias' option 3:

> On Tue, 10 Sept 2024 at 11:57, Matthias Leisi <matthias@leisi.net> wrote:
>
>     I’m looking for input on a database design question. 
>
>     Suppose you have an application that allows the user to add some kind of
>     field to the application („custom fields“, „user defined fields“, „extended
>     fields“, …), which could be of different types (eg string, int, bool, date,
>     array of <any other type>, …), and which would have some additional
>     properties (like a display name or description, or some access control
>     flags).
[...]
>     How would you design this from a DB point of view? I see a few options, but
>     all have some drawbacks:
[...]
>     3) Use a „data table“ with one column per potential type (fieldid,
>     valstring, valint, valbool, …). Drawback: complex to query, waste of
>     storage? Pro: use all DB features on „true“ columns, but without needing
>     DDL privileges.


>     Are these the right drawbacks and pro arguments? Do you see other options?

I pretty much agree with your analysis. I used to use your option 3 a
lot, mostly because I thought that the schema should be fixed at design
time and not changed by the application. I'm less dogmatic now and would
probably lean more to your option 1 (let the application add columns to
an "extension table").

        hp

--
   _  | Peter J. Holzer    | Story must make more sense than reality.
|_|_) |                    |
| |   | hjp@hjp.at         |    -- Charles Stross, "Creative writing
__/   | http://www.hjp.at/ |       challenge!"

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Achilleas Mantzios - cloud
Date:
Subject: Re: Strange permission effect depending on DEFERRABILITY
Next
From: Pecsök Ján
Date:
Subject: Error:could not extend file " with FileFallocate(): No space left on device