RE: normalization
- From: "Hostetter, Jay M" <JHostetter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "Oracle-L Freelists" <Oracle-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 13:37:11 -0500
I hope this person has a good reason for doing something that is "not
recommended".
This may help:
http://www.alphabetcitydataworks.com/FundamentalsOfRelationalDatabaseDes
ign.doc
Scroll down to Third Normal Form.
-----Original Message-----
From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Chris Stephens
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 1:25 PM
To: Oracle-L Freelists
Subject: normalization
There is a discussion going on at work concerning calculated fields.
I am claiming that any calculated field in a table is a violation of at
least 3NF if not 2NF. I can find all sorts of references on the web
that justify my position but nothing that directly says this violates
normalization rules.
The person who i disagree with is claiming that 'technically',
calculated fields do not violate 3NF. They are just not recommended.
I am unable to find anything on the web coinciding with this argument.
Anyone know of a site with a direct statement that calcualted fields
violate 2NF/3NF?
thanks,
chris
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
**DISCLAIMER
This e-mail message and any files transmitted with it are intended for the use
of the individual or entity to which they are addressed and may contain
information that is privileged, proprietary and confidential. If you are not
the intended recipient, you may not use, copy or disclose to anyone the message
or any information contained in the message. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify the sender and delete this e-mail
message. The contents do not represent the opinion of D&E except to the extent
that it relates to their official business.
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
