Re: One To Many To One Common Problem
- From: "Douglas J. Steele" <NOSPAM_djsteele@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2008 15:40:04 -0400
The normal approach is to use a form and subform. A query on table MOVIE
forms the recordsource for the parent form, while a query on table
MOVIEGENRE forms the recordsource for the subform. The subform's a
continuous form, where the Genre field is bound to a combo box that shows
all the rows in table GENRE.
--
Doug Steele, Microsoft Access MVP
http://I.Am/DougSteele
(no e-mails, please!)
"Paul B" <pabarkley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:0cc7bb49-e7b2-41f8-96d2-9a6be9d6a608@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
This seems to be a perrenial problem with many database designs.
Using a simple example of a movie database (but I have other
examples), one MOVIE belongs in one to many GENREs, and one GENRE has
zero to many MOVIEs. So obviously there is a many to many
relationship. You break that up with an associative entity in the
middle, MOVIEGENRE, that contains the foreign key for MOVIE and the
foreign key for GENRE. So far so good. And if I open the table
MOVIEGENRE and type in MovieID and GenreID in a record, I can add as
many records as I want.
There must be SOME way to get multiple GENREs to show up and
be updatable for each MOVIE. Any suggestions? Thanks.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: One To Many To One Common Problem
- From: Paul B
- Re: One To Many To One Common Problem
- References:
- One To Many To One Common Problem
- From: Paul B
- One To Many To One Common Problem
- Prev by Date: turn off warning message in mde
- Next by Date: RE: Conditional formatting changes field enabled property?
- Previous by thread: One To Many To One Common Problem
- Next by thread: Re: One To Many To One Common Problem
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|