Using Enum Types in Databases: Best Practices and Alternatives

When designing a database schema, one common question is whether to use the database’s built-in ENUM type for fields that have a limited set of valid values. While ENUM types can seem appealing for their data integrity guarantees, they come with significant drawbacks that can complicate application development and maintenance.

Below is a breakdown of the pros and cons of using ENUM types in databases versus alternative approaches.

---

Option 1: Database ENUM type

✅ Pros

• Data integrity at the DB level The database guarantees only allowed values are stored.
• Self-documenting schema Anyone inspecting the DB sees valid values immediately.
• Slightly smaller storage / faster comparisons (DB-dependent)

❌ Cons (these matter a lot in practice)

• Schema changes are painful

  • Adding/removing values requires a migration
  • Some DBs lock the table (e.g., MySQL)

• Hard to evolve

  • Renaming a value is risky
  • Removing old values can break historical data

• Couples business logic to the DB

  • Application logic changes now require DB changes

• Poor portability

  • ENUM support and behavior differs across MySQL, Postgres, Oracle

• ORM friction

  • Often awkward with Hibernate/JPA, Sequelize, etc.

When DB ENUM makes sense

• Very stable, closed set of values
• Rarely changes (e.g., gender, currency_code in some systems)
• Small internal system with low schema-change cost

---

Option 2: VARCHAR / STRING in DB + Enum in code (recommended)

✅ Pros

• Flexible and evolvable

  • Add new enum values without DB migrations

• Clean separation of concerns

  • DB stores data
  • Application enforces business rules

• Better for microservices & CI/CD

  • Faster deployments, fewer migrations
• Excellent ORM support

• Easier backward compatibility

  • Old values can still exist safely

❌ Cons

• DB doesn’t enforce validity by default

  • Requires discipline in code
  • Can be mitigated (see below)

How to mitigate the downsides

• Use application-level enums
• Add validation at API/service layer
• Optionally add a DB CHECK constraint (best of both worlds):

ALTER TABLE orders
ADD CONSTRAINT chk_status
CHECK (status IN ('NEW', 'PAID', 'SHIPPED', 'CANCELLED'));

This is much easier to evolve than DB ENUMs.

---

Option 3: Lookup table (often the best long-term choice)

status
------
id
code   (NEW, PAID, SHIPPED)
label  (New Order, Paid, Shipped)

✅ Pros

• Fully normalized
• Supports localization, metadata, ordering, flags
• Values can be enabled/disabled without code changes
• Strong referential integrity

❌ Cons

• Slightly more complex
• Requires joins

Best for

• User-visible statuses
• Configurable workflows
• Enterprise systems

---

Recommendation (practical rule)

Use this decision table 👇

Scenario	Best Choice
Status / state that may evolve	STRING + enum in code
User-facing values	Lookup table
Very stable, never-changing values	DB ENUM (maybe)
Microservices / frequent releases	STRING + enum in code
ORM-based Java/Spring apps	STRING + enum in code

---

Java / Spring Boot best practice (example)

public enum OrderStatus {
    NEW,
    PAID,
    SHIPPED,
    CANCELLED
}

@Enumerated(EnumType.STRING)
@Column(length = 20, nullable = false)
private OrderStatus status;

DB column:

status VARCHAR(20) NOT NULL

✅ Readable ✅ Safe ✅ Easy to evolve

---

Bottom line

If you expect change, don’t use DB ENUM.

For most modern applications (especially ones like the systems you’re building with Spring Boot and AWS), VARCHAR in DB + enum in code (+ optional CHECK constraint) is the sweet spot.