Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    2

    Question Database Desgin Comparision

    Dear

    I am making a database design with my group mate but was not able to decide which one is correct.(see attached image) Kindly help me rate (1 to 10) these two designs for normalization and correctness.

    Thanks
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails comapre_database_design.jpg  

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    5,516
    Can you actually rate correctness on any other scale other than "yes" and "no"?
    ---
    "It does not work" is not a valid problem statement.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    In front of the computer
    Posts
    15,579
    I'd rate example 1 as a 4, 2, 6.

    Example 2 is more like 4, 4, 4.

    -PatP
    In theory, theory and practice are identical. In practice, theory and practice are unrelated.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    out on a limb
    Posts
    13,692
    wherever I see a column or table name suffixed with a number Im always suspicious that the design is flawed
    I'd rather be riding on the Tiger 800 or the Norton

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    5,516
    Quote Originally Posted by Pat Phelan View Post
    I'd rate example 1 as a 4, 2, 6.
    Normalization = 4; correctness = 2; What quality is rated 6?
    ---
    "It does not work" is not a valid problem statement.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    In front of the computer
    Posts
    15,579
    The proposed measures and the ranking qualities don't match up... It doesn't make sense to rank either normalization or correctness on a ten point scale, neither of them work in ways that can be ranked like that.

    Normalization can be ranked by Normal Form, by GD (for EAV type/NoSQL architectures), by hierarchy dependency, graph type, etc. None of these map well to a 1 to 10 scale.

    Correctness is usually expressed using one of the "goodness of fit" models, but all of them that I've used require a methodology which in turn requires a descriptor/measurement pair or pairs. None of them offer a single measurement, much less one that fits on a ten point scale.

    The best way that I could answer within the constraints posed by the OP was to use the circa 1975 Brigham-Noore diagram analysis. The measurements are for complexity, oortness, and aesthetic value of the diagram itself.

    -PatP
    In theory, theory and practice are identical. In practice, theory and practice are unrelated.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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