2 ms·
What might be needless is the "4" in "4NF," because the first three (and a half) are obsolete. Or rather, as you mention, were only relevant when things were re
by pessimizer 2y ago
What might be needless is the "4" in "4NF," because the first three (and a half) are obsolete. Or rather, as you mention, were only relevant when things were read sequentially. "Normalization" is really fine on its own.
Things that aren't normalized are "ad hoc," or really just "input."
- cma 2y agoSequential is still faster in a lot of cases even on SSDs and RAM (prefetching)
- petalmind 2y ago> Things that aren't normalized are "ad hoc," or really just "input." I agree that every denormalization is "ad hoc". It may not even feel this way because sometimes such ad-hocs become intimately tied into the system performance architecture. However I'm not sure if I agree with "just input", or maybe that's a different way of saying that: sometimes (often) you denormalize from 3NF to avoid a join. Often you can demonstrate that avoiding join is benefitial, by looking at query plan. But the problem with teaching is that people become generally more afraid of joins, somehow thinking that every join is killing performance or something. ChatGPT produces a lot of FUD around joins and performance, unfortunately...