MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAKna9VbQ=o2Yhjo1EitaxzYpWAXe9vw6QtamzCsNNp2-rQOFSA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKFQuwYpai5snt5mEgyXK4m6nR5T6sP-YTYH-GQ0Hs2rXS7uLA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKna9VZdihb=n9mNGaCZLKYbWAoS0+knfi_PAfLC5w=Mj5Egig@mail.gmail.com> <D4CAF64D-2F47-470B-9F14-860FFD7FD2E7@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <D4CAF64D-2F47-470B-9F14-860FFD7FD2E7@gmail.com>
From: Lok P <loknath.73@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2024 11:58:23 +0530
Message-ID: <CAKna9VaNKPR9XruS-yz0qLLgAyik6L-_kGX=C8B682wRSmnn=A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Design strategy for table with many attributes
To: Guyren Howe <guyren@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-general <pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000004ff6d7061c7a2c8e"
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAKna9VaNKPR9XruS-yz0qLLgAyik6L-_kGX%3DC8B682wRSmnn%3DA%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

--0000000000004ff6d7061c7a2c8e
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, Jul 5, 2024 at 10:45=E2=80=AFAM Guyren Howe <guyren@gmail.com> wrot=
e:

> On Jul 4, 2024, at 22:07, Lok P <loknath.73@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> If you stick to the principle of grouping columns in a table when you use
> those columns together, you should be good.
>
> Note that you might want to split up the =E2=80=9Cparent=E2=80=9D table i=
f that naturally
> groups its columns together for certain uses. In that case, you could hav=
e
> the same pk on all the 1:1 tables you then have. In that case, the pk for
> each of those tables is also the fk.
>


Thank you.

When you said below,

*"Note that you might want to split up the =E2=80=9Cparent=E2=80=9D table i=
f that naturally
groups its columns together for certain uses. In that case, you could have
the same pk on all the 1:1 tables you then have. In that case, the pk for
each of those tables is also the fk."*
Do you mean having a real FK created through DDL and maintaining it or just
assume it and no need to define it for all the pieces/tables. Only keep the
same PK across all the pieces and as we know these are related to the same
transaction and are logically related?

--0000000000004ff6d7061c7a2c8e
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div=
 dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Fri, Jul 5, 2024 at 10:45=E2=80=AFAM G=
uyren Howe &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:guyren@gmail.com">guyren@gmail.com</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>On =
Jul 4, 2024, at 22:07, Lok P &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:loknath.73@gmail.com" ta=
rget=3D"_blank">loknath.73@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br><div><br></div><div>=
If you stick to the principle of grouping columns in a table when you use t=
hose columns together, you should be good.</div><div><br></div><div>Note th=
at you might want to split up the =E2=80=9Cparent=E2=80=9D table if that na=
turally groups its columns together for certain uses. In that case, you cou=
ld have the same pk on all the 1:1 tables you then have. In that case, the =
pk for each of those tables is also the fk.</div></div></blockquote><div><b=
r></div><div><br></div>Thank you.<br><br>When you said below,<br><i>&quot;N=
ote that you might want to split up the =E2=80=9Cparent=E2=80=9D table if t=
hat naturally groups its columns together for certain uses. In that case, y=
ou could have the same pk on all the 1:1 tables you then have. In that case=
, the pk for each of those tables is also the fk.&quot;<br></i><br><div>Do =
you mean having a real FK created through DDL and maintaining it or just as=
sume it and no need to define it for all the pieces/tables. Only keep the s=
ame PK across all the pieces and as we know these are related to the same t=
ransaction and are logically related?=C2=A0</div></div></div>

--0000000000004ff6d7061c7a2c8e--