| |
|
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above.
You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.
To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
|
 |
04-16-08, 10:36
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 33
|
|
|
Wikipedia about denormalization...
|
|
Hi,
I came across this in Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Databas...enormalization
Quote:
|
It has never been proven that this denormalization itself provides any increase in performance, or if the concurrent removal of data constraints is what increases the performance. The need for denormalization has waned as computers and RDBMS software have become more powerful.
|
What do you make of this? I am not experienced when it comes to design OLAP database but I am wondering, if it has never been proven why all OLAP database I have seen were denormalized and why people are mostly preaching 'star schema' for DW design?
Thoughts?
|
|
04-16-08, 11:40
|
|
another indirection layer
|
|
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,312
|
|
can't wait till blindman sees this one... 
|
|
04-16-08, 13:32
|
|
World Class Flame Warrior
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 11,726
|
|
|
|
OK, that's really stupid.
Normalization if primarily about data integrity, not efficiency. So I would say, if anything, increases in processing power have decreased the downside of normalization and made it all the more valuable.
Absolute ignorance.
__________________
If it's not practically useful, then it's practically useless.
blindman 
www.chess.com: "sqlblindman"
|
|
04-16-08, 13:38
|
|
World Class Flame Warrior
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 11,726
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by widiotipedia
The normalized alternative to the star schema is the snowflake schema.
|
Another gem.
__________________
If it's not practically useful, then it's practically useless.
blindman
www.chess.com: "sqlblindman"
|
|
04-16-08, 14:26
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 33
|
|
|
|
04-16-08, 14:27
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 33
|
|
I mean for clarifying this, this quote from wikipedia did sound inaccurate but wanted to make sure
|
|
04-16-08, 16:42
|
|
SQL Consultant
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 19,524
|
|
gentlemen, if you do not like something on wikipedia, you are not allowed to bitch about it if you're too lazy to fix it
either bitch and then fix it, or just shut the heck up
thank you
|
|
04-16-08, 17:02
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 33
|
|
|
|
04-16-08, 18:40
|
|
World Class Flame Warrior
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 11,726
|
|
Its not that I am too lazy to fix Wikipedia. It is that I have no desire to get into a religious war over database best practices with DBAs on yet another site.
I have my hands full here on dbforums keeping you and Pat in line.
__________________
If it's not practically useful, then it's practically useless.
blindman
www.chess.com: "sqlblindman"
|
|
04-16-08, 18:48
|
|
SQL Consultant
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 19,524
|
|
religious war? how can that possibly happen, if what you say is true and the entry contains really bad information?
either the information is bad, in which case there will be no religious war when you fix it, or else the information is actually quite contentious, in which case your earlier comments here deriding it are unfair, as they do not present a balanced viewpoint (since it's contentious)
so yeah, my conclusion is you are too lazy
|
|
04-17-08, 03:24
|
|
King of Understatement
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: One Flump in One Place
Posts: 14,905
|
|
You are in a mischievous mood today\ yesterday Rudy. Jolly good show!
__________________
Testimonial:
Quote:
pootle flump
ur codings are working excelent.
|
|
|
04-17-08, 08:39
|
|
World Class Flame Warrior
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 11,726
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by r937
so yeah, my conclusion is you are too lazy
|
I'd go up to Canada and kick your a$$, but I really can't be bothered at the moment.
By they way, have you edited the MySQL page on wikipedia?
__________________
If it's not practically useful, then it's practically useless.
blindman
www.chess.com: "sqlblindman"
|
|
04-17-08, 09:06
|
|
SQL Consultant
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 19,524
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by blindman
... have you edited the MySQL page on wikipedia?
|
nope, that wasn't me, it must have been some other miscreant
|
|
04-17-08, 10:45
|
|
World Class Flame Warrior
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 11,726
|
|
I'll suggest that Pat edit it then.
__________________
If it's not practically useful, then it's practically useless.
blindman
www.chess.com: "sqlblindman"
|
|
04-18-08, 10:30
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 3,611
|
|
Is this topic ready to be removed? There are no post and view counts against it...But it's quite a show! Can't believe how much I missed!!!
__________________
"The data in a record depends on the Key to the record, the Whole Key, and
nothing but the Key, so help me Codd."
|
|
| Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
|
| Display Modes |
 Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
dBforums
>
Wikipedia about denormalization...
