MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAMXrOMOav1m8Ep01o7_GDLWxLSpgMp+o4d3FNdmOY7RoWe5B7Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAMXrOMOav1m8Ep01o7_GDLWxLSpgMp+o4d3FNdmOY7RoWe5B7Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Muhammad Salahuddin Manzoor <salahuddin.m@bitnine.net>
Date: Thu, 23 May 2024 09:01:16 +0500
Message-ID: <CAKD7CD=aoXdRMLjOWR-S+TPgMqWGiY9Wn7RgTG4nkVgwgBR99w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Json table/column design question
To: Skorpeo Skorpeo <skorpeo11@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000fde4270619171a7a"
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAKD7CD%3DaoXdRMLjOWR-S%2BTPgMqWGiY9Wn7RgTG4nkVgwgBR99w%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

--000000000000fde4270619171a7a
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Greetings,
Storing unrelated JSON objects in the same table with distinct columns for
each type (e.g., "Users" and "Inventory") is generally not a sound good
approach may affect Query Performance and Optimization, Storage Efficiency,
scalability and Maintenance, Data Integrity.
Recommended approach is to have separate tables.

*Salahuddin (=EC=82=B4=EB=9D=BC=ED=9B=84=EB=94=98*
*)*


On Thu, 23 May 2024 at 08:39, Skorpeo Skorpeo <skorpeo11@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I was wondering if having unrelated columns in a table is a sound approac=
h
> when using json.  In other words, if I have two collections of unrelated
> json objects, for example "Users" and "Inventory", would it be ok to have
> one table with a "Users" column and a "Inventory" column?  My concern is
> that from a row perspective the columns could be different lengths, such =
as
> more inventory items as users.  And for any given row the data in one
> column would have no relation to another column. I would only query a
> single column at a time.
>
> Would this approach be ok or are there pitfalls such that it would be
> advantageous/recommended to have a separate table for each column?
>
> Any thoughts/inputs are greatly appreciated.
>
> Many thanks.
>

--000000000000fde4270619171a7a
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">Greetings,<div>Storing unrelated JSON objects in the same =
table with distinct columns for each type (e.g., &quot;Users&quot; and &quo=
t;Inventory&quot;) is generally not a sound good approach may affect Query =
Performance and Optimization, Storage Efficiency, scalability and Maintenan=
ce, Data Integrity. <br>Recommended approach is to have separate tables.<br=
><div><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_signature" data-smartmail=3D"gmail_si=
gnature"><div dir=3D"ltr"><table width=3D"520px" height=3D"100px" cellspaci=
ng=3D"0" cellpadding=3D"0" style=3D"font-size:13px;border:1px solid rgb(255=
,255,255);color:rgb(51,51,51)"><tbody><tr><td style=3D"border:1px solid rgb=
(255,255,255)"><br></td><td style=3D"border:1px solid rgb(255,255,255)"><p =
dir=3D"ltr" style=3D"line-height:1.2;margin-top:6pt;margin-bottom:6pt"><fon=
t color=3D"#2255ff" face=3D"arial, sans-serif" size=3D"2"><b>Salahuddin (=
=EC=82=B4=EB=9D=BC=ED=9B=84=EB=94=98</b></font><b style=3D"color:rgb(34,85,=
255);font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:small">)<br></b></p></td></tr><=
/tbody></table></div></div></div><br></div></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_qu=
ote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Thu, 23 May 2024 at 08:39, Sk=
orpeo Skorpeo &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:skorpeo11@gmail.com">skorpeo11@gmail.co=
m</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin=
:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"=
><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>Hi,</div><div><br></div><div>I was wondering if havi=
ng unrelated columns in a table is a sound approach when using json.=C2=A0 =
In other words, if I have two collections of unrelated json objects, for ex=
ample &quot;Users&quot; and &quot;Inventory&quot;, would it be ok to have o=
ne table with a &quot;Users&quot; column and a &quot;Inventory&quot; column=
?=C2=A0 My concern is that from a row perspective the columns could be diff=
erent lengths, such as more inventory items as users.=C2=A0 And for any giv=
en row the data in one column would have no relation to another column. I w=
ould only query a single column at a time.</div><div><br></div><div>Would t=
his approach be ok or are there pitfalls such that it would be advantageous=
/recommended to have a separate table for each column?</div><div><br></div>=
<div>Any thoughts/inputs are greatly appreciated.</div><div><br></div><div>=
Many thanks.<br></div></div>
</blockquote></div>

--000000000000fde4270619171a7a--