Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

3
  • We have considered this option but the current scenario is like, we already have a working code, up and running wherein there's only one SecID for each UserID. Now there's a new requirement as per which a particular User can have multiple SecIDs. Since there's already a set of existing functions for (SecID-UserID) pair, so we are trying to accommodate this new requirement in our existing environment. Adding a new Table would mean having to add new methods to our program. So this doubt :) Commented Apr 16, 2015 at 10:07
  • You would still have to change your table since your string field is not an integer field, and then you'd have to change your software to handle that field. What you describe is what I'd call "a fundamentally bad design decision". Commented Apr 16, 2015 at 11:41
  • Completely agree with you on the "bad design" part :), anyway we have decided to go for a separate table as we are not able to figure out any other better option. Commented Apr 17, 2015 at 8:58