Now would you normalize the database or keep your database in de-normalized form.

Although, denormalized schema can greatly improve performance under extreme read-loads but the updates and inserts become complex as the data is duplicate and hence has to be updated/inserted in more than one places.

One clean way to go about solving this problem is through the use of triggers. For example in our case where the %(red)[orders] table has the %(red)[product_name] column as well, when the value of %(red)[product_name] has to be updated, then it can simply be done in the following way:

• Have a trigger setup on the %(red)[products] table that updates the %(red)[product_name] on any update to the %(red)[products] table.
• Execute the update query on the %(red)[products] table. The data would automatically be updated in the %(red)[orders] table because of the trigger.

However, when de-normalizing the schema, do take into consideration, the number of times you would be updating records compared to the number of times you would be executing SELECTs. When mixing normalization and de-normalization, focus on de-normalizing tables that are read intensive, while tables that are write intensive keep them normalized.

link text

Now, as a student of the Database Management System, you are going to design the database for above application. In the database design, your main concern will be the “efficiency” in term of searching. Now would you normalize the database or keep your database in de-normalized form.

Justify your answer in either case with proper reasons.

%(red)[Note: Answer should not exceed 200 words.]