Lance, I wouldn't worry too much about having empty fields vs an extra table in your database. I think having data models that are easy to work with is far more important than making sure you don't have fields that are empty some time. I wouldn't worry at all about a field that is empty a lot. I would just setup my models however made the app logic simplest.
Just my 2 cents... Alex On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 6:35 PM, Lance F. Squire <la...@alteeve.com> wrote: > > On the many to many field, > > Great info, I'll look into those. > > On combining the fields, > > 'Thumbs' is really Thumbnail images of 'Images'. > > However, not all 'Images' have 'Thumbs' > > Thinking that 3 possibly blank fields in 'Images' is more efficient > than 9 fields in a different table for each actual thumbnail image... > (Of course enough 'Images' without Thumbs could weigh the other way, > But for what I'm doing I'm sure there will be more 'Images' with > 'Thumbs' than without. > > Again, Thanks. > > Lance > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Django users" group. > To post to this group, send email to django-us...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-us...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en.
