5 ms·
I may be "denormalizing" the question itself a bit, but I think of it thusly: - The 3rd normal form is when I'm thinking about the entities in a top-down way.
by smitty1e 3y ago
I may be "denormalizing" the question itself a bit, but I think of it thusly:
- The 3rd normal form is when I'm thinking about the entities in a top-down way.
- In a key-value store, I'm thinking of a GUID with a related document, typically JSON, with some arbitrary structure. It's a bottom-up approach. The individual records matter more than the entity.
Argue the theoretical, top-down all day long, and watch me agree. But, like as not, your MongoDb / ElasticSearch / DynomoDb tables are doing a lot in production in the Real World(TM). They get the job done.
Probably driving the point too far here, but it all boils down to Plato vs. Aristotle.
- mitchitized 3y agoI remember when Mongo was first coming out: People would install it, then shove a third normal form schema in it and then complain loudly that it didn't support transactions, foreign constraints or other RDBMS-specific stuff. Like cold-welding 2' wings on a '55 Thunderbird and then complaining loudly that it makes a lousy airplane. KNOW YOUR TOOLS. Just like programming languages, each one is likely good a some things and lousy at others, it is up to YOU to know which is the right one for a given need or scenario. And get off my lawn.