Harry T
Harry T

Reputation: 131

Database design: should nested objects have their own table?

I'm somewhat new to database design, so I'd like some pointers on how best to lay my current tables out.

I have a table Jobs that holds various jobs. Users can create Subjobs. A Subjob has a Job as a parent. A Subjob has all the same properties as a Job, but some of them are read-only, whereas they are all read/write for a Job. A Job can have many Subjobs. At the moment, there may only be one layer of subjobs, but I'd like the flexibility to allow for infinite nesting of Subjobs in the future. The objects will be interacted with through a MVC web app.

I've considered two options for layout:

Any advice on how to handle this? Are there additional design patterns I haven't considered? I'm using Entity Framework 6 Code First, if that matters.

Upvotes: 3

Views: 4208

Answers (1)

SqlZim
SqlZim

Reputation: 38023

The first option is fine if you were not describing a hierarchy with multiple levels, but you are. The pattern you are describing is commonly known as an Adjacency List which is stored as you describe your second option.

Some other options for storing a hierarchy are:

  • Nested sets (more complicated implementation but potentially faster queries without recursion).
  • Materialized Path (Stores a character representation of the hierarchy path, e.g. like a file storage system)
  • Modifications / Helper tables for Adjacency List (Flat table, bridge table)
  • Custom implementations like HierarchyId

Hierarchy Reference:

Upvotes: 4

Related Questions