Doubt in the order of the fields of the table in case of foreign keys with less importance hierarchically

Asked

Viewed 40 times

1

Hello dear programmers! I’m just a beginner in the world of programming and Stackoverflow and need to ask a question!

I’m making some adjustments in a database I’m working on after finding great guidelines for standardizing fields and tables. As I have two tables that have contact fields (email, phone, optional phone) and address (street, neighborhood, zip code, etc...), I decided to make a table contact and a table addressee which will store this information and have a relationship with the other two tables mentioned.

Since my goal is that this bank be "standardized" so that other programmers find a standardized and easy to understand bank, the ideal is that foreign keys are always at the beginning of the table, after the primary keys, or I can leave the fields in order of importance, regardless of whether they are foreign keys or not?

  • Oi Hugo, these good practice questions are difficult to answer, each team has its own practices. During the initial design step of the database I try to sort fields in order of importance: Ids, secondary keys, non-zero important fields, other non-zero fields, null fields and finally Fks.

  • On the other hand, if the software has already been published I avoid reordering fields. I know it’s the 21st century and no one should have to answer column indexes... but... Anyway, on average during the design phase I try to leave FKS that are not Pks at the bottom of the table. That said, this is a matter of opinion and you can easily find someone who says just the opposite.

  • Hi Anthony, thank you for the answer. I will follow your methodology!

No answers

Browser other questions tagged

You are not signed in. Login or sign up in order to post.