Why does the revisions schema not store an entire post's contents in a single record, rather creating three records, one for each component of a post?
For example, if the post is of a type question, a new revisions record is created for each the title, the body, and the tags. The revisions are grouped with a
revisionsGUID column. Would it not be simpler to store the entire post in a single history record?--instead of breaking out the post into three records, you can create a column for each component in the same record.
This would be no more redundant than the posts table, where answer posts leave the title and tags columns blank anyway.
Isn't that more efficient and less complex? Why run three queries and break the post data down by type? Doesn't this add complexity to the logic?
There are far brighter people who thought of this, but it's beyond me to see the advantages of modeling the data this way.
Can anyone elaborate as to why this is the case?