in reply to Re: OT - SQL choosing a schema for index tables
in thread OT - SQL choosing a schema for index tables

Of course it is possible --- but now the program is needed to explain those bit-values that are in the database. I count that as a disadvantage.

Does not sound like a good idea to me. It would be more acceptable when the mapping could be done inside the database (thus documenting these bit-fields). But even then this does look like over-engineering to me. (There are 200 rows, the OP has said).

  • Comment on Re^2: OT - SQL choosing a schema for index tables

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: OT - SQL choosing a schema for index tables
by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Aug 28, 2015 at 15:18 UTC
    It would be more acceptable when the mapping could be done inside the database

    It's pretty trivial to set up secondary table(s) that maps bits to strings. Done right, they could be joined to produce human readable output.


    With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
    Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
    "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". I knew I was on the right track :)
    In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
    I'm with torvalds on this Agile (and TDD) debunked I told'em LLVM was the way to go. But did they listen!