I've followed this list for quite a long time, and I think that I've discovered a pattern that I would like to discuss. It seems like there are two camps considering EAV models. On the one hand, there are researchers who think that EAV is a great way to meet their objectives. On the other hand, there are the "business" guys who thnk that EAV is crap. I've seen this pattern often enough and consistently enough that I think there may be an underlying difference of objectives concerning the use of databases itself that may be responsible for this divergence. I'm a researcher type, and I've made an EAV model that suits me well in my genealogy research. How can you associate an essentially unknown number of sundry "events" to a "person" without an EAV model? It seems to me that data models made for research is a quite different animal than data models made for business. In research, we often need to register data that may be hard to pin down in exactly the right pigeon hole, but never the less need to be recorded. The most sensible way to do this, IMO, is frequently to associate the data with some already- known or postulated entity. That's where the EAV model comes in really handy. -- Leif Biberg Kristensen | Registered Linux User #338009 Me And My Database: http://solumslekt.org/blog/ -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
