Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    33

    Wikipedia about denormalization...

    Hi,

    I came across this in Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Databas...enormalization

    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?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    1,313
    can't wait till blindman sees this one...

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    12,592
    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"
    www.LobsterShot.blogspot.com

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    12,592
    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"
    www.LobsterShot.blogspot.com

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    33
    Lol

    thanks

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    33
    I mean for clarifying this, this quote from wikipedia did sound inaccurate but wanted to make sure

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    20,002
    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

    rudy.ca | @rudydotca
    Buy my SitePoint book: Simply SQL

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    33
    lol, you are right

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    12,592
    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"
    www.LobsterShot.blogspot.com

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    20,002
    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

    rudy.ca | @rudydotca
    Buy my SitePoint book: Simply SQL

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    One Flump in One Place
    Posts
    14,912
    You are in a mischievous mood today\ yesterday Rudy. Jolly good show!
    Testimonial:
    pootle flump
    ur codings are working excelent.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    12,592
    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"
    www.LobsterShot.blogspot.com

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    20,002
    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

    rudy.ca | @rudydotca
    Buy my SitePoint book: Simply SQL

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    12,592
    I'll suggest that Pat edit it then.
    If it's not practically useful, then it's practically useless.

    blindman
    www.chess.com: "sqlblindman"
    www.LobsterShot.blogspot.com

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    San Antonio, TX
    Posts
    3,662
    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."

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •