Paul Archer wrote: > 11:31am, Paul Archer wrote: > > >> <snip> >> >> Only that seems inefficient. Could I normalize that somehow? >> > I talked this over with a coworker. He suggested one table each for users, > client machines, and filesystems, just for lookups. Then one table for a > combination of the three, and one table for timeperiods with the bytes > written or read for each time period. >
That's not just normalized...it's first normal form. ;) (more or less) Matt _______________________________________________ Houston mailing list [email protected] http://mail.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/houston
