CHAPTER 1
Database Design

THIS CHAPTER DISCUSSES THE DDL (Data Definition Language), which is used to create a database schema. It is related to the next chapter on the theory of database normalization. Most bad queries start with a bad schema. To get data out of the bad schema, you have to write convoluted code, and you are never sure if it did what it was meant to do.

One of the major advantages of databases, relational and otherwise, was that the data could be shared among programs so that an enterprise could use one trusted source for information. Once the data was separated from the programs, we could build tools to maintain, back up, and validate the data in one place, without worrying about hundreds or even thousands of application programs possibly working against each other.

SQL has spawned a whole branch of data modeling tools devoted to designing its schemas and tables. Most of these tools use a graphic or text description of the rules and the constraints on the data to produce a schema declaration statement that can be used directly in a particular SQL product. It is often assumed that a CASE tool will automatically prevent you from creating a bad design. This is simply not true.

Bad schema design leads to weird queries that are trying to work around the flaws. These flaws can include picking the wrong data types, denormalization, and missing or incorrect constraints. As Elbert Hubbard (American author, 1856–1915) put it: “Genius may have its limitations, but stupidity is not thus handicapped.”

1.1 Schema and Table Creation

The major problem in learning SQL is that programmers are used to thinking in terms of files rather than tables.

Programming languages are usually based on some underlying model; if you understand the model, the language makes much more sense. For example, FORTRAN is based on algebra. This does not mean that FORTRAN is exactly like algebra. But if you know algebra, FORTRAN does not look all that strange to you. You can write an expression in an assignment statement or make a good guess as to the names of library functions you have never seen before.

Programmers are used to working with files in almost every other programming language. The design of files was derived from paper forms; they are very physical and very dependent on the host programming language. A COBOL file could not easily be read by a FORTRAN program, and vice versa. In fact, it was hard to share files even among programs written in the same programming language!

The most primitive form of a file is a sequence of records, ordered within the file and referenced by physical position. You open a file, then read a first record, followed by a series of next records until you come to the last record to raise the end-of-file condition. You navigate among these records and perform actions one record at a time. The actions you take on one file have no effect on other files that are not in the same program. Only programs can change files.

The model for SQL is data kept in sets, not in physical files. The “unit of work” in SQL is the whole schema, not individual tables.

Sets are those mathematical abstractions you studied in school. Sets are not ordered, and the members of a set are all of the same type. When you perform an operation on a set, the action happens “all at once” to the entire membership of the set. That is, if I ask for the subset of odd numbers from the set of positive integers, I get all of them back as a single set. I do not build the set of odd numbers by sequentially inspecting one element at a time. I define odd numbers with a rule “If the remainder is 1 when you divide the number by 2, it is odd” that could test any integer and classify it. Parallel processing is one of many, many advantages of having a set-oriented model.

SQL is not a perfect set language any more than FORTRAN is a perfect algebraic language, as we will see. But if you are in doubt about something in SQL, ask yourself how you would specify it in terms of sets, and you will probably get the right answer.

1.1.1 CREATE SCHEMA Statement

A CREATE SCHEMA statement, defined in the SQL Standard, brings an entire schema into existence all at once. In practice, each product has very different utility programs to allocate physical storage and define a schema. Much of the proprietary syntax is concerned with physical storage allocations.

A schema must have a name and a default character set, usually ASCII or a simple Latin alphabet as defined in the ISO Standards. There is an optional AUTHORIZATION clause that holds a for security. After that the schema is a list of schema elements:

A schema is the skeleton of an SQL database; it defines the structures of the schema objects and the rules under which they operate. The data is the meat on that skeleton.

The only data structure in SQL is the table. Tables can be persistent (base tables), used for working storage (temporary tables), or virtual (VIEWs, common table expressions, and derived tables). The differences among these types are in implementation, not performance. One advantage of having only one data structure is that the results of all operations are also tables, you never have to convert structures, write special operators, or deal with any irregularity in the language.

The has to do with limiting user access to certain schema elements. The is not widely implemented yet, but it works as a constraint that applies to the schema as awhole. Finally, the , , and deal with the display of data. We are not really concerned with any of these schema objects; they are usually set in place by the DBA (database administrator) for the users, and we mere programmers do not get to change them.

Conceptually, a table is a set of zero or more rows, and a row is a set of one or more columns. Each column has a specific data type and constraints that make up an implementation of an abstract domain. The way a table is physically implemented does not matter, because you only access it with SQL. The database engine handles all the details for you and you never worry about the internals, as you would with a physical file.

In fact, almost no two SQL products use the same internal structures. SQL Server uses physically contiguous storage accessed by two kinds of indexes; Teradata uses hashing; Nucleus (SAND Technology) uses compressed bit vector; Informix and CA-Ingres use more than a dozen different kinds of indexes.

There are two common conceptual errors made by programmers who are accustomed to file systems or PCs. The first is thinking that a table is a file; the second is thinking that a table is a spreadsheet. Tables do not behave like either, and you will get surprises if you do not understand the basic concepts.

It is easy to imagine that a table is a file, a row is a record, and a column is a field. This concept is familiar, and when data moves from SQL to the host language, it must be converted into host language data types and data structures to be displayed and used.

The big differences between working with a file system and working with SQL are in the way SQL fits into a host program. If you are using a file system, your programs must open and close files individually. In SQL, the whole schema is connected to or disconnected from the program as a single unit. The host program might not be authorized to see or manipulate all of the tables and other schema objects, but that is established as part of the connection.

The program defines fields within a file, whereas SQL defines its columns in the schema. FORTRAN uses the FORMAT and READ statements to get data from a file. Likewise, a COBOL program uses a Data Division to define the fields and a READ to fetch it. And so it goes for every 3GL’s programming; the concept is the same, though the syntax and options vary.

A file system lets you reference the same data by a different name in each program. If a file’s layout changes, you must rewrite all the programs that use that file. When a file is empty, it looks exactly like all other empty files. When you try to read an empty file, the EOF (end of file) flag pops up and the program takes some action. Column names and data types in a table are defined within the database schema. Within reasonable limits, the tables can be changed without the knowledge of the host program.

The host program only worries about transferring the values to its own variables from the database. Remember the empty set from your high school math class? It is still a valid set. When a table is empty, it still has columns, but has zero rows. There is no EOF flag to signal an exception, because there is no final record.

Another major difference is that tables and columns can have constraints attached to them. A constraint is a rule that defines what must be true about the database after each transaction. In this sense, a database is more like a collection of objects than a traditional passive file system.

A table is not a spreadsheet, even though they look very similar when you view them on a screen or in a printout. In a spreadsheet you can access a row, a column, a cell, or a collection of cells by navigating with a cursor. A table has no concept of navigation. Cells in a spreadsheet can store instructions, not just data. There is no real difference between a row and column in a spreadsheet; you could flip them around completely and...