Jackson Miller wrote:
I understand that having this many tables is crazy, but I don't understand why
it is not better.
Several reasons. One is complexity, another is administration.
Using one table per user is nasty because it's too complicated. You
have 200 tables to keep track of, each wit
---
> > From: Jackson Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 10:47 AM
> > To: Jake Johnson
> > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: More tables or more joins
> >
> >
> > I appreciate the idea of normalizing, but those tabl
ease.
Regards,
Mike Hillyer
www.vbmysql.com
> -Original Message-
> From: Jackson Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 10:47 AM
> To: Jake Johnson
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: More tables or more joins
>
>
> I appreci
I appreciate the idea of normalizing, but those tables wouldn't meet the spec.
There would also have to be a column value table at the very least. Also,
why would you have user_id and cont_id in both the user_table and the
contract table.
Also if you read my post you would see that I am talki
You don't want to have a separate table for each user. That would cause a
maintenance nightmare.
Try normalizing your data
user table
--
user_id
cont_id
user_name
Contract lookup
cont_id
Cont_Name
Contract Column Lookup
--
col_id
col_name
Cont
