4 ms·
Doesn't that happen when you use a highly normalized database table design, though where you create tables to avoid repeating data? Or if you have a lot of 1/ma
by rhdunn 3y ago
Doesn't that happen when you use a highly normalized database table design, though where you create tables to avoid repeating data? Or if you have a lot of 1/many to many relationships in mapping tables. I.e. you'll end up with a lot of tables you need to join on to collate that data (authors, subjects, languages, etc.) to display to the user.
You could break the joins into three parts:
1. searching/filtering -- which tables you need to join on to match the selected queries;
2. sorting -- determining which column(s) of data to sort the results by; and
3. displaying -- which tables you need to join on to retrieve the information needed to display the information to the user.
These may be different or have overlaps.
- stouset 3y agoI think they’re saying that JOINing over three or four tables is really just not that big a deal for most situations, particularly if you have the needed indices.
- rhdunn 3y agoYeah. That's something you would expect databases to be good at. Expecially as normalization and many-to-many relationships make multiple JOINs common, which was my point.
- ergonaught 3y agoJoins are rarely the problem. See the sigh.