Re: Abnormal Normalization?
From: tina (nospam_at_address.com)
Date: 05/25/04
- Next message: RK: "RE: barcode"
- Previous message: John Vinson: "Re: Help with Old Database - new requests"
- In reply to: Brian Kastel: "Re: Abnormal Normalization?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 05:50:37 GMT
well, that all sounds normal and above-board - whew! <g>
and, welcome to the crowd. i've been coming here almost a year; i answer
some easy questions - and mostly read a lot and learn a whole bunch. anyone
who can write VB in their sleep is bound to be an asset to us all (well, so
long as you're not coding during nightmares!) :)
"Brian Kastel" <be-ar-eye-ay-en--kay-ay-ess-tee-ee-ell@tampabay.rr.com>
wrote in message news:nHAsc.18768$0X2.531778@twister.tampabay.rr.com...
> lol... Let me set your mind at ease... It is a construction company.
Some
> of the employees end up contracting the company itself to do remodeling or
> repairs, in which case their address becomes all four addresses! I had to
> separate jobs from clients because a client can contract for more than one
> job, and I had to separate contacts from clients because many clients
could
> share one contact and many contacts could be assigned to one client. It
even
> does labor tracking per job and payroll calculations. I thought it was a
> masterpiece of design when I was finished (HUGE <g>). If attaching
binaries
> were not rude, I would show you a picture of the relationships in this
puppy
> (all with ERI)...
>
> I just wanted a reality check. Thanks. I'm really just an advanced
> dilettante. I can write VB code in my sleep (I actually have a copy of
> VB1 -- it's DOS-based, if you didn't know), and I love designing RDs in
> Access because of that. Sometimes, I even get paid to do it, though not
as
> much as I would like (in either sense of the word). I came here the other
> day to ask a question, got an answer in five minutes, and stuck around to
> try to give back a little bit if I could.
>
> Peace.
>
>
> "tina" <nospam@address.com> wrote in message
> news:5Vzsc.25256$fF3.653762@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> well, if a person can fill multiple roles in the data you're storing, i
can
> see a reason to have a separate "person" table. and storing honorifics in
a
> table as opposed to using a value list in the RowSources of combo boxes, i
> do that myself - for several reasons. you could apply the same reasons to
> justify a separate supporting table (i hate to call them lookup tables)
for
> the suffixes.
> but the first/middle and last name separations? yeah, i think you're going
a
> little table-crazy there. <g>
> and the addresses bit? i'm not even going to touch that one! but i have to
> admit the idea of an employee also being a contact (which i've always used
> with the connotation of an entity *outside* my customer's organization),
and
> the idea of an employee having the same address as a client, or a job
> site....all this makes me wonder what-in-the-heck kind of business this
> database will be used in! <big g>
>
>
> "Brian Kastel" <be-ar-eye-ay-en--kay-ay-ess-tee-ee-ell@tampabay.rr.com>
> wrote in message news:k1xsc.25753$Ol3.19925@twister.tampabay.rr.com...
> > I took people's names out of my Employees and Contacts tables, and
created
> a
> > Names table with the PK linked to a FK in each of the two original
tables.
> > I did this because sometimes the employee could also be the contact, or
> > vice-versa. But I didn't stop there. I created four tables; one for
name
> > prefixes (Mr., Ms., etc.), one for name suffixes (Esq., Ph.D., etc.),
one
> > for forenames (for first and middle names), and one for surnames. So
now
> I
> > have nothing in the Names table except for its own PK and the five FKs
> > linking with the simple tables (First and Middle names both being linked
> to
> > the Forenames table). I know this is decidedly 3NF, but does anyone
think
> > that I am overdoing it?
> >
> > The madness doesn't end there, either. Employees, Contacts, Job Sites,
> and
> > Clients can all share one address. Of course, I now have one Addresses
> > table linked to those four, but I found I had to assign each address a
> > "title" to allow for practical selection of the address from a list or
> > combo. Again, am I overdoing it? Laziness prompted me to create this
> > structure: since I would be the one doing the data entry, I simply
didn't
> > want to enter data more than once, ever.
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
- Next message: RK: "RE: barcode"
- Previous message: John Vinson: "Re: Help with Old Database - new requests"
- In reply to: Brian Kastel: "Re: Abnormal Normalization?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
