I currently have this schema:
CREATE TABLE `users` (
`users_id` int(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
`users_name` varchar(50),
`users_lastname` varchar(50),
`users_dob` date,
`users_type` int(11) NOT NULL default 0,
`users_access` int(11) NOT NULL default 0,
`users_level` int(11) NOT NULL default 0,
/* etc...*/
PRIMARY KEY (`users_id`)
) ENGINE=MyISAM DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1;
CREATE TABLE `users_types` (
`types_id` int(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
`types_name` varchar(50),
PRIMARY KEY (`types_id`)
) ENGINE=MyISAM DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1;
/* etc..*/
Query:
SELECT
types_name AS user_type,
/* all other fields*/
users.*
FROM users
INNER JOIN users_types ON (users.users_type=types_id);
/* INNER JOIN for all other tables*/
/* Rest of query */
My new solution:
CREATE TABLE `users` (
`users_id` int(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
`users_name` varchar(50),
`users_lastname` varchar(50),
`users_dob` date,
`users_type` ENUM('type1', 'type2', 'type3'),
`users_access` ENUM('access1', 'access2', 'access3'),
`users_level` ENUM('level1', 'level2', 'level3'),
/* etc...*/
PRIMARY KEY (`users_id`)
) ENGINE=MyISAM DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1;
Query:
SELECT
*
FROM users
From what I see is using ENUM is very simple and can be very fast to execute.
Thanks
MySQL ENUM data type contains the following advantages: Compact data storage where the column may have a limited set of specified possible values. Here, the string values automatically used as a numeric index. It allows readable queries and output because the numbers can be translated again to the corresponding string.
If you have 42 columns to store and you are selecting only 4 columns, then yes the other columns can affect the query since it increases the amount of disk I/O the server uses to select the wider table.
Empty or NULL Enumeration Values If you insert an invalid value into an ENUM (that is, a string not present in the list of permitted values), the empty string is inserted instead as a special error value.
1 Answer. Using '=' operator is faster than the LIKE operator in comparing strings because '=' operator compares the entire string but the LIKE keyword compares by each character of the string.
Personally, I think the int data type should be used and ENUM-ification of that data should be done in another layer.
The table definition is a poor place to store your gamut of enum values. It's hard to get at easily, and giving your application the power to modify table definitions is a security problem (possibly).
Instead, I would recommend using an INT type and then in your software, creating a model that interacts with the database below to give the appearance of an ENUM.
With this design choice, switching database software is trivial, you don't need to grant "ALTER TABLE" privileges to your production app, and extending your enum is easy. Plus, then you are reducing the number of times that the program needs to do the translation from ENUM -> integer -- it can be done at compile-time instead of with every database SQL request.
1) Yes, it would be faster, as the ENUM datatype is indexed in the table itself (i.e. no need to read another table for each record)
2) Yes, as long as you don't want to use those fields in any other table. As soon as you want to use a given field in more than one table, you should create a separate lookup table for that field. Also, if you want the field to have user-definable values (and not require them to modify the database directly to change them), you should use a separate table.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With