Re: hi all

a few further comments:

On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 06:54:53PM +0530, Ashish Karalkar wrote:
> CREATE TABLE users (
> user_id serial NOT NULL ,

It's common to combine this with the PRIMARY KEY constraint from below
to be:

user_id SERIAL PRIMARY KEY,

the NOT NULL check is implicit in this and thus redundant.

> user_name varchar(50) NOT NULL,

As a general design question; should user_name have a UNIQUE constraint
on it? i.e.

user_name VARCHAR(50) NOT NULL UNIQUE,

> secret_question varchar(255),
> secret_answer varchar(255),

as pointed out, these look like they should probably be of TEXT type.

> creator int,

I'd combine this with the FOREIGN KEY constraint from below as well:

creator INT REFERENCES users (user_id),

> date_created timestamp NOT NULL default to_timestamp('0000-00-00 00:00:00','YYYY-MM-DD HH24:MI:SS'),

What's this strange 0000-00-00 date you speak of? As far as I know
it's not valid; dates go from 1BC to 1AD without a zero in the middle.
Shouldn't you just remove the NOT NULL check or maybe '-infinity' would
be better.

date_created TIMESTAMP,
or
date_created TIMESTAMP NOT NULL DEFAULT '-infinity',
or should it really be
date_created TIMESTAMP NOT NULL DEFAULT now(),

> voided smallint NOT NULL default '0',

Is this really an INT, or should it be a BOOL:

voided BOOL NOT NULL DEFAULT FALSE,

> date_voided timestamp,

I tend to have these as "end dates" defaulting to 'infinity' as it's
easier to do checks on them then:

date_voided TIMESTAMP NOT NULL DEFAULT 'infinity',

hope that helps!

--
Sam http://samason.me.uk/