Everyone else is going to respond to this question focusing on the issues of NULL-ness or NOT NULL-ness, etc...
I'd like to step back a bit and reflect on a different concern, one of design: Is this a data warehouse application, and the proposed ACTIVE_FLAG column an indicator of which "version" of a record is supposed to "active" when there are multiple versions, such as...
ID EFF_DT ACTIVE_FLAG
So, the row with the latest EFF_DT value for each distinct ID value has ACTIVE_FLAG = 'Y', while all the other (older) rows with the same ID value have ACTIVE_FLAG = 'N'? And each time a newer row is added for a particular ID value, then the existing row with ACTIVE_FLAG = 'Y' will need to be updated?
If this is the case, then please know that this method of using an ACTIVE_FLAG to identify the "current" or "active" row will become one of the biggest ETL performance problems in your data warehouse, and even worse it will prevent you from making use of the time-variant nature of your data in order to set tablespaces containing older data to READ ONLY. Thus, as your data warehouses grows in volume, it will continue to be necessary to backup the entire database on a regular basis, and the entire database will continue to reside on expensive "tier 1" storage, and your loins will become barren, and locusts will blanket the earth, and... sorry, got kind of carried away there...
But if this is not the case, then never mind...... :-)
Tim Gorman consultant - Evergreen Database Technologies, Inc. P.O. Box 630791, Highlands Ranch CO 80163-0791 website = http://www.EvDBT.com/ email = Tim@xxxxxxxxx mobile = +1-303-885-4526 fax = +1-303-484-3608 Yahoo IM = tim_evdbt
Steiner, Randy wrote: