(Sorry, resending so the list gets the response as well.) On Dec 7, 2007 11:00 AM, Thibaut Barrère <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Shouldn't duration be a dimension? If the value is being stored in the > > fact table as a measurement then it should be an additive or > > semi-additive value, of which string is neither. Would it be possible > > for you to store it in a dimension? > > Yes it's possible, although less comfortable ! I've kept some dimension-like > fields as attribute of the fact for simplicity so far.
I would suggest that unless it is a FK to a dimension, a degenerate dimension (which in this case may have been the case for the duration) or a measurement (which also may be the case for the duration) then it should not be in the fact table. I think the question of duration is a bit sticky because on the one hand it is a measurement, but on the other it can have values that are non-numeric if you allow it to do so (which you do). > > >> I've got one idea: replacing this column by two; one would keep the > quality > >> of the data, "Reliable","Unreliable", "Unknown" to be able to filter > relevant > >> data, the other one would keep an integer value, and some default value > when > >> nothing reliable or known is available. > > If I transform it into a dimension, should I split the value into two like I > suggested, to allow filtering ? Or is there another practice ? Yes, I think you should separate it into multiple values. V/r Anthony _______________________________________________ Activewarehouse-discuss mailing list Activewarehouse-discuss@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/activewarehouse-discuss
