summary records in fact table
Several sources suggest that you should NOT add summary information to a fact table. For example here: "Do not mix granularities in the fact table. Do not add summary records to the fact table that include detail facts already in the fact table. Aggregation summary records, if used, must be stored in separate tables, one table for each level of granularity." Yet the example on this page does so. dfrankow (talk) 23:27, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
The "fact-less fact" table is most analogous to a "junction" table, and I find authors commonly writing "(junction table)" in quotes after the term "fact-less fact table". Jtankers (talk) 22:17, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Are accumulating snapshots poor form?
According to the star schema article, fact tables are usually in 3NF. However, by the description of an accumulating snapshot, it may contain null fields, and thus is not even in 1NF. It should either be noted here that they are in poor form, or are an exception to the "usual" rule for star schemas. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qseep (talk • contribs) 00:02, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Steps in designing a fact table
If the Kimball approach in the citation is the alternative - what is the source for the method actually given in the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Infojunkie23 (talk • contribs) 14:04, 7 March 2014 (UTC)