Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-D508A3E6-C056-4B23-B2CB-F413BEBE3626
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Rob Sargent <robjsargent@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Subject: Re: Schema design: user account deletion vs. keeping family tree data
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2025 08:43:07 -0700
Message-Id: <20E42D70-9BE1-4CD9-B9A4-5E22EC73C791@gmail.com>
References: <CAEDh4nz_cKNGg0yX8k0yigZM8Ww=vcpv-0m_vMyR0je+5Kzm4Q@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Christoph Pieper <christoph@fecra.de>,
 pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org
In-Reply-To: <CAEDh4nz_cKNGg0yX8k0yigZM8Ww=vcpv-0m_vMyR0je+5Kzm4Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Bernice Southey <bernice.southey@gmail.com>
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20E42D70-9BE1-4CD9-B9A4-5E22EC73C791%40gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk


--Apple-Mail-D508A3E6-C056-4B23-B2CB-F413BEBE3626
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


> On Nov 24, 2025, at 6:18=E2=80=AFAM, Bernice Southey <bernice.southey@gmai=
l.com> wrote:
>=20
> =EF=BB=BFChristoph Pieper <christoph@fecra.de> wrote:
>> Question:
>> =46rom a PostgreSQL point of view (database best practices, data integrit=
y, performance and long=E2=80=91term maintainability at millions of rows), w=
hich approach would you prefer, or is there a better pattern for this kind o=
f =E2=80=9Caccount can be deleted, but genealogy should remain=E2=80=9D use c=
ase?
>=20
> I can tell you what I'm doing. It solved many design problems, but I
> don't claim it's "best practice". I split my table in two.
>    1 - columns that I can keep indefinitely
>    2 - personal data
> That way I just delete the personal data row when I want to remove it.
>=20
> Thanks, Bernice
>=20
>=20

+1
Names are tricky, messy things.[1] Keep egoMaPa as leans as possible.

[1] https://www.kalzumeus.com/2010/06/17/falsehoods-programmers-believe-abou=
t-names/


--Apple-Mail-D508A3E6-C056-4B23-B2CB-F413BEBE3626
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html><head><meta http-equiv=3D"content-type" content=3D"text/html; charset=3D=
utf-8"></head><body dir=3D"auto"><div dir=3D"ltr"></div><div dir=3D"ltr"><br=
></div><div dir=3D"ltr"><br><blockquote type=3D"cite">On Nov 24, 2025, at 6:=
18=E2=80=AFAM, Bernice Southey &lt;bernice.southey@gmail.com&gt; wrote:<br><=
br></blockquote></div><blockquote type=3D"cite"><div dir=3D"ltr">=EF=BB=BF<s=
pan>Christoph Pieper &lt;christoph@fecra.de&gt; wrote:</span><br><blockquote=
 type=3D"cite"><span>Question:</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type=3D"ci=
te"><span>=46rom a PostgreSQL point of view (database best practices, data i=
ntegrity, performance and long=E2=80=91term maintainability at millions of r=
ows), which approach would you prefer, or is there a better pattern for this=
 kind of =E2=80=9Caccount can be deleted, but genealogy should remain=E2=80=9D=
 use case?</span><br></blockquote><span></span><br><span>I can tell you what=
 I'm doing. It solved many design problems, but I</span><br><span>don't clai=
m it's "best practice". I split my table in two.</span><br><span> &nbsp;&nbs=
p;&nbsp;1 - columns that I can keep indefinitely</span><br><span> &nbsp;&nbs=
p;&nbsp;2 - personal data</span><br><span>That way I just delete the persona=
l data row when I want to remove it.</span><br><span></span><br><span>Thanks=
, Bernice</span><br><span></span><br><span></span><br></div></blockquote><br=
><div>+1</div><div>Names are tricky, messy things.[1] Keep egoMaPa as leans a=
s possible.</div><div><br></div><div>[1]&nbsp;<a href=3D"https://www.kalzume=
us.com/2010/06/17/falsehoods-programmers-believe-about-names/">https://www.k=
alzumeus.com/2010/06/17/falsehoods-programmers-believe-about-names/</a></div=
><br></body></html>=

--Apple-Mail-D508A3E6-C056-4B23-B2CB-F413BEBE3626--