Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • Home
  • SEARCH
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 798761
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 14, 20262026-05-14T23:01:26+00:00 2026-05-14T23:01:26+00:00

After reading this question , I’ve learned that denormalization is not a solution for

  • 0

After reading this question, I’ve learned that denormalization is not a solution for simplicity. What about this case?

I have news-articles which have a list of sites-article-will-be-published-to. The latter can be expressed in normalized fashion either by table and a many-to-many relationship (via a cross-table, I think). But the simple solution is to just throw in a bunch of booleans for the sites-article-will-be-published-to (publish_to_site_1, publish_to_site_2 etc.). Assuming the sites are:

  1. small in number
  2. will not change over time
  3. have no fields themselves, except a name

Is this still a terrible idea? The many-to-many relationship seems somewhat cumbersome, but I’ve done it before in cases like this (and it seemed cumbersome).

Note: I’m doing this in Rails, where it’s not that painful. On the other hand, the metaprogramming makes things like this trivial

(1..5).each { |site| do_something(article["publish_to_site_#{site}".to_symbol]) }
  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-14T23:01:27+00:00Added an answer on May 14, 2026 at 11:01 pm

    If these conditions are actually satisfied, then no, it’s not a terrible idea.

    In fact, this is not even denormalization: Denormalization usually means that you are storing some information redundantly, for sake of performance. In your example, since the sites do not have fields themselves, you are not storing stuff redundantly. You are just depriving yourself from the opportunity to store additional fields for the sites in the future (without violating normalization or redesigning your database).

    So, this is OK (normalized):

    article                        show_on_stackoverflow    show_on_my_blog
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Denormalize for Simplicity             YES                     NO
    More simplicity                        YES                     YES
    ...
    

    But this is not OK (redundancy):

    article                        show_on_stackoverflow    stackoverflow_mainpage_url   show_on_my_blog    my_blog_mainpage_url
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Denormalize for Simplicity             YES              http://stackoverflow.com            NO          http://my.blog.url       
    More simplicity                        YES              http://stackoverflow.com            YES         http://my.blog.url
    ...
    
    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Ask A Question

Stats

  • Questions 414k
  • Answers 414k
  • Best Answers 0
  • User 1
  • Popular
  • Answers
  • Editorial Team

    How to approach applying for a job at a company ...

    • 7 Answers
  • Editorial Team

    What is a programmer’s life like?

    • 5 Answers
  • Editorial Team

    How to handle personal stress caused by utterly incompetent and ...

    • 5 Answers
  • Editorial Team
    Editorial Team added an answer taxonomy_node_get_terms function. http://api.drupal.org/api/function/taxonomy_node_get_terms/6 Or also: taxonomy_node_get_terms_by_vocabulary http://api.drupal.org/api/function/taxonomy_node_get_terms_by_vocabulary/6 May 15, 2026 at 8:44 am
  • Editorial Team
    Editorial Team added an answer Two patterns from Bill Venners; I think both are heavily… May 15, 2026 at 8:43 am
  • Editorial Team
    Editorial Team added an answer In the cqse of widely distributed databases with shards all… May 15, 2026 at 8:43 am

Trending Tags

analytics british company computer developers django employee employer english facebook french google interview javascript language life php programmer programs salary

Top Members

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.