1nf Violation/bad practice ?

  • We have a transaction table thats all fine and hunky dorry apart from two fields right at the end.. verification_number_1 and verfication_number2.

    On spotting this I'm kinda concerned as apparently a transaction can contain any combination of data e.g neither field populated, either one or the other populated , or indeed both populated.

    Correct me if Im wrong but doesn't this go against first normal form ? is it inheriantely evil or ,,, ?

    If it is bad what would be a preferred alternative ?

    many thanks

    ~si

  • Well, theorically speaking it's a violation of normal form, but practically speaking I don't see anything nasty. The main question you have to ask yourself is: "will these two verification numbers remain forever two, or is somebody coming up tomorrow with a third one?".

    Maybe Boyce and Codd will not agree, but nobody's going to die if you keep it this way.

    I used to be a "purist" years ago, but I had to work with too many horribly-designed databases to get concerned by two verification numbers.

    Regards Gianluca

    -- Gianluca Sartori

  • Gianluca Sartori (8/7/2008)


    Well, theorically speaking it's a violation of normal form, but practically speaking I don't see anything nasty. The main question you have to ask yourself is: "will these two verification numbers remain forever two, or is somebody coming up tomorrow with a third one?".

    Maybe Boyce and Codd will not agree, but nobody's going to die if you keep it this way.

    I used to be a "purist" years ago, but I had to work with too many horribly-designed databases to get concerned by two verification numbers.

    Regards Gianluca

    thank you gianluca .. much appreciated !

    hmmm Im assured there will never be more than two .. but I've heard that before !

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply