Subject: more on the benchmark

From: [email-masked]
Date: 08 Apr 1993 12:57:42 -0400 (EDT)

Rick points out that dept is a time varying attribute.  The reason for
considering an attribute like budget is it is not a non-key attrinute.
It can be compared with another non-key attribute like salary. Dept
is a key in mgr relation.
 
I agree with Jim renameing the mgr relation as departmet.
 
I also agree with Jim on his coorect observation on the keys.  I guess
name can be replaced by ss#.  However, this is not as appealing as the
name is.  We should be aware of implications of assuming name as a key.
 
I still feel strongly that we should not look for 3Nf relations.
How does TSQL community feel about this?
Abdullah

---

From: "Rick Snodgrass" <rts>
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1993 10:59:44 MST

> From: [email-masked]
>  

It depends on whether "3Nf" refers to the model-independent schema,
using the definition as "all snapshots are in 3NF" or it refers to
a particular representation. As the benchmark is to be independent
of representation, the snapshot interpretation should be used.

Given this, it seems that little is lost, and much is gained, by
having the highest feasible normal form. For this reason, I advocate
attempting BCNF, which seems to be possible for the schemas under
consideration.