Changes to make Centralized data smaller: Difference between revisions

Line 29:

* The table has a lot of fields that are only populated for MB, an not even consistently there. Do you use any of these fields for aggregation? Do you use this table at all when you do geographic analysis, or do you have a different one? They are all 255char fields, so if there are any we don't use we should consider eliminating them. There are also some erratic entries in there, eg. latitudes and longitudes missing their decimal points, or rhacode and province blank... do we need to review this? [[User:Ttenbergen|Ttenbergen]] 16:38, 2022 August 10 (CDT)

** yes I use the table and particularly helpful for MB where the RHA are listed. i do not use the latitudes or longitudes. if occupying more space, one option is to separate the MB from the rest. maybe save the rest to another accdb but keep the MB. besides, new postal codes often occur at WPG/MB. ---[[User:JMojica|JMojica]] 09:44, 2022 August 11 (CDT)

*** How about the CA, CA_Name, NC, NC_Name columns - do you use those? If you use the table we will just keep it in there, but I might still reduce the field sizes, they don't need to be 255. [[User:Ttenbergen|Ttenbergen]] 10:52, 2022 August 11 (CDT) }}

*** How about the CA, CA_Name, NC, NC_Name columns - do you use those? If you use the table we will just keep it in there, but I might still reduce the field sizes, they don't need to be 255. [[User:Ttenbergen|Ttenbergen]] 10:52, 2022 August 11 (CDT)

**** I think I have used it when asked where from winnipeg area patients come from but very rare. - --[[User:JMojica|JMojica]] 11:03, 2022 August 11 (CDT) }}

If Pagasa is the only user of this table we could move it into a different file, which would just have to be added to the push pull and reconnect machinery for Pagasa.

@@ Line 29: / Line 29: @@
 * The table has a lot of fields that are only populated for MB, an not even consistently there. Do you use any of these fields for aggregation? Do you use this table at all when you do geographic analysis, or do you have a different one? They are all 255char fields, so if there are any we don't use we should consider eliminating them. There are also some erratic entries in there, eg. latitudes and longitudes missing their decimal points, or rhacode and province blank... do we need to review this? [[User:Ttenbergen|Ttenbergen]] 16:38, 2022 August 10 (CDT)
 ** yes I use the table  and particularly helpful for MB where the RHA are listed.  i do not use the latitudes or longitudes.  if occupying more space, one option is to separate the MB from the rest.  maybe save the rest to another accdb but  keep the MB.  besides, new postal codes often occur at WPG/MB.  ---[[User:JMojica|JMojica]] 09:44, 2022 August 11 (CDT)
-*** How about the CA, CA_Name, NC, NC_Name columns - do you use those? If you use the table we will just keep it in there, but I might still reduce the field sizes, they don't need to be 255. [[User:Ttenbergen|Ttenbergen]] 10:52, 2022 August 11 (CDT) }}
+*** How about the CA, CA_Name, NC, NC_Name columns - do you use those? If you use the table we will just keep it in there, but I might still reduce the field sizes, they don't need to be 255. [[User:Ttenbergen|Ttenbergen]] 10:52, 2022 August 11 (CDT)
+**** I think I have used it when asked where from winnipeg area patients come from but very rare. - --[[User:JMojica|JMojica]] 11:03, 2022 August 11 (CDT)   }}
 If Pagasa is the only user of this table we could move it into a different file, which would just have to be added to the push pull and reconnect machinery for Pagasa.