▲ | ZYbCRq22HbJ2y7 5 days ago | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Yeah, I mean, an integer can definitely hold more data than a boolean. If your data was simple enough, you could have an integer hold the entire meaning of a table's row, if every client understood how it was interpreted. You could do bitwise manipulations, encodings, and so on. Sometimes it is nice to understand what the data means in the schema alone. You can do that with enums, etc.
These are more of the sort of things I don't see needing enums, timestamps, integers... | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
▲ | grey-area 5 days ago | parent [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
I’ve never seen anything remotely like that in a schema and it seems inappropriate anyway - those should IMO be timestamps like saw_eclipse_at not booleans. You should not encode business rules in the schema (like certain magic dates) because those business rules always change over time. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|