I stopped worrying and learned to love denormalized tables
For the third time this week, in relatively unrelated fields of computation science, I&#x27;m reminded of the quote: &quot;Duplication is less expensive than the wrong abstraction&quot;.<p>An awful lot of the time, a table schema is a <i>terrible</i> abstraction of the actual series it is designed to record. Sometimes it&#x27;s designed under constraints that exist only to self-sustain the abstraction. Some of them have viable reasoning, some don&#x27;t. How these structures sustain themselves for . . decades . . is a mystery to me. These non-relational movements, in part represented by the OP article, are (in part) attempts to shift the computing from data to the actual programmatic area. Because the real world doesn&#x27;t have schemas - although that&#x27;s still, incredibly, a source of intense disagreement.<p>Just an interesting thing that keeps cropping up. I wonder what the formal, &quot;scientific&quot; name for this is?