From: Marnen Laibow-Koser <marnen@...>
Date: 2009-11-23T01:05:27+09:00
Subject: Re: Pseudo array for Rails migration

Ralph Shnelvar wrote:
[...]
> RK> ?  Btw, having columns with indexes in their name is considered bad
> RK> schema design because you either could normalize it into another 
> table
> RK> and join or provide more meaningful names instead of "x02" if it is 
> used
> RK> as a placeholder.  My 0.02EUR.
> 
> RK> Kind regards
> 
> First of all, I'm a noob.  I should have said that.
> 
> Thus your solution
> (1) Makes sense.
> (2) Explains a lot about Ruby.
> 
> For both I thank you.
> 
> 
> In terms of normalizing the database, I ran some timing tests and
> normalizing it slows me down a couple of orders of magnitude.  I'm
> willing to live with the lack of purity for the sake of performance.

A couple orders of magnitude?   This suggests to me that your 
normalization and/or queries are poorly done.  What is chewing up so 
much time, and what does the normalized schema look like?  It should be 
possible to find a solution that performs reasonably and doesn't have 20 
repeating fields.

Best,
--
Marnen Laibow-Koser
http://www.marnen.org
marnen@marnen.org
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.