That said, you can approximate an IS-A relationship between tables, but it's cumbersome and prone to mistakes.
This statement seems contradictory to your idea about a separate table for optional attributes. That is merely a further generalization of the approximate IS-A relationship, and is equally cumbersome and prone to mistakes, if not moreso.
How is it more cumbersome to have the tables
Animal .id .name .type Mammal .animal_id .hair_color Reptile .animal_id .num_of_limbs
Than to have the tables you are proposing?
Animal .id .name .type AnimalAttribute .animal_id .attribute_id .value Attribute .id .name
--
You said you wanted to be around when I made a mistake; well, this could be it, sweetheart.
In reply to Re^3: OO concepts and relational databases
by Solo
in thread OO concepts and relational databases
by dragonchild
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |