Yeah I have to agree with Ben here - besides a join shouldn't be a huge hit if you've indexed properly. Also bear in mind that although a join does cost, so does having a massive file in the database which could have been saved by making your tables smaller and having less redundant data, and your hard drive is always gonna be slower than anything else in a system (except maybe your network but that data should be smaller and now we're getting gigabit between machines so...)
my 2c James > -----Original Message----- > From: Ben Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, 15 October 2004 2:19 PM > To: CFAussie Mailing List > Subject: [cfaussie] Re: search > > > The problem with any argument for allowing redundancy in a database is > that it neglects the fact that applications can and often do grow in > scope and functionality. A tiny 2-table application can grow into > something much larger and if you don't design your database right the > first time you will eventually have to fix that problem down the > track. > > --- > You are currently subscribed to cfaussie as: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To unsubscribe send a blank email to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Aussie Macromedia Developers: http://lists.daemon.com.au/ > --- You are currently subscribed to cfaussie as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aussie Macromedia Developers: http://lists.daemon.com.au/
