Here we go again, the discussion about the claimed benefits of the Data Vault. Thomas Christensen has written some great blog posts about his take on the Vault method. Dan Linstedt has been commenting.
The discussions are a good read to track:
Apologies in advance for my spelling errors in the comments, the posts are written while travelling.
As with most complex subjects, it is often hard to have people state with clarity what EXACTLY their claim is and what their supporting arguments are. It seems that the Vault is no exception – I hope the discussions lead somewhere this time.
For your reference, here are some of the posts I have previous done that solve the postulated problems with the Kimball model.
- An overview of Source Key Pathologies - Where I argue that problems with sources are inevitable
- Transforming Source Keys to Real Keys – Map Tables - Where I show how to handle source key problems inside the Kimball model (not with Hubs/Satellites)
- Why you need to stop Worrying about UPDATE - Addressing the claim that models which require UPDATE statements are dangerous)
- The dangers of Between Joins - Which are the inevitable result of Data Vault models.
Notice that there are some very interesting claims being made about normalization creating more load and query parallelism in the comments on Thomas Christensen’s Blog by Sanjay. I personally look forward to hearing the argument for that.