Cross-posted from “What would be the best way to store the country of a user in SQL?” by @lena@gregtech.eu in !learn_programming@programming.dev


I use Gorm. This is the current code:

package main

import (
	"fmt"
	"log"

	"gorm.io/driver/sqlite"
	"gorm.io/gorm"
)

type Env struct {
	DB     *gorm.DB
	Logger *log.Logger
}

type User struct {
	ID           uint
	Username     string
	Name         string
	Email        string
	PasswordHash string
	Country      string //should probably be a foreign key of another table
}

func initDB() {
	env := &Env{}
	db, err := gorm.Open(sqlite.Open("gorm.db"), &gorm.Config{})
	if err != nil {
		fmt.Printf("Error opening database: %v", err)
		return
	}
	env.DB = db
	env.DB.AutoMigrate(&User{})

}

func main() {
	initDB()
}

As you can see in the comment in the code, I assume the best way would be to have a table of countries and then assign each user to one via a foreign key. However, it seems a bit cumbersome to manually create a list of all countries. Is there a better way to do this?

    • Lena ( lena@gregtech.eu ) OP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Am I supposed to make an SQL statement that puts these country codes into a table, along with the country’s name? There’s probably a better way. Maybe I could make a new entry for every unique country a user is from

      • not sure I understand the distinction between the “am I supposed to” and “maybe I could” parts?

        You should create a table of all countries, you can just copy that from the above link. Then you reference that table with a foreign key in your users table.

          • locuester ( locuester@lemmy.zip ) 
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Heya, long time dev here.

            If you’re not expecting millions of rows, you could just use the country code directly in the user table and not use a foreign key/table at all. Just an idea.

            However, if you want the country table, i would find this list in a csv format (or copy paste into goog sheets or such and massage it) and then use a tool or write a quick script to ingest it into the db. If you’re doing that you should design the country table to have id, code, name. It can be used for populating dropdowns or autocomplete or such too.

            Over-engineering is a thing; keep it simple. If you’re doing this mainly as an exercise to learn, over-engineering can be ok - just understand that it doesn’t HAVE to be done any particular way, and there is no “right” way. Design is subjective and varies based on the needs of your software.

          • That’s a perfectly valid approach, yes. We do exactly this, at work. It’s pretty common, if not ubiquitous, to have your database schema consist of not only structure, but data as well. We call it static data, and it’s all defined in deployable scripts, just like our tables and views are. If ISO makes changes to the dataset, then it’s just a table update to match it. And ISO is nice about keeping backwards compatibility inb their standards.

            Since this is not strictly your own data, you could also go with just storing the code value on your tables, and letting the UI layer do the lookup, either with built-in features of your language/framework, or with a static csv file, like you mention. You may not want to do this for static data that is entirely your own, like, say, a status or type enum, since it makes your database schema less-self-descriptive, and more prone to becoming invalid.

            You could also set the country code up as a not-strictly-enforced foreign key, where your app will lookup additional info (E.G. the proper name) for a country code, if it’s a standard one, but just skip that if it’s not a standard one.

            It’s up to you what you think is most appropriate.

  • ulterno ( ulterno@programming.dev ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    It will depend upon other things you might want to do with it in the future.
    If you want the record to stay “correct” in the future, you might want to have a separate entry for nationality information, which will be a 1-to-1 mapping with the other table you make for it. Why? …

    • in the nationality information, along with the country code (for which you want to allow 3 character codes for forward compatibility), the date at which the the information was given in the form
    • if possible, also include the date at which the nationality was provided (as in, provided to the user by the nation)

    This should help determine what kind of change may occur in case of changes in the political landscape in the future, without you requiring to re-ask the form-filler.


    Inspired by https://flightaware.engineering/falsehoods-programmers-believe-about-aviation/
    And I am going to consider this stuff every time I make a database schema.

    Stuff in the real world is subject to change, so instead of only storing the provided data as you asked for, make a ledger for events. And someone submitting a forms, will be another event.

    This way, you get the flexibility to verify the provided data in the future, using information that you will have in the future, but don’t have at the time the data was provided.

    Of course, this is only needed if it is needed.