If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Proper Table(s) Layout
I have created a couple of Dbs which the table structure seemed to simply
fall into place, it was just logical in my head. That said, I am working on a new db and for some reason I am doubting myself and wanted a second opinion. The db is basically a contract db to input all the info, and there is a lot of info, for each contract. Where I am 'lost' is the fact that the contracts are broken into categories: clients, components,engineering, warantee... For all of the components (with the exception of clients) there are a number of fields but only 1 entry per contract. Basically my question is, should I be rolling out one huge table with all of the data or should I be creating a project table and then multiple category table with a 1-to-1 relationship? My gut is telling me to go with a single table, but at the same time I have never needed to create such a big table and it feels wrong! Thank you for your enlightenment on the subject. QB |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Proper Table(s) Layout
I would read up on the rules for database normalization.
If your different types of contract have substantially different data requirements, I'd put anything common in one table and anything specific to that type of contract in a separate table. However, to an extent it depends on how the data will be accessed and used and also the volume of the data. If you went with one table and then later needed to add a new type of contract, it could be a hassle whereas if you had separate tables it would be easier. -- Dorian "Give someone a fish and they eat for a day; teach someone to fish and they eat for a lifetime". "QB" wrote: I have created a couple of Dbs which the table structure seemed to simply fall into place, it was just logical in my head. That said, I am working on a new db and for some reason I am doubting myself and wanted a second opinion. The db is basically a contract db to input all the info, and there is a lot of info, for each contract. Where I am 'lost' is the fact that the contracts are broken into categories: clients, components,engineering, warantee... For all of the components (with the exception of clients) there are a number of fields but only 1 entry per contract. Basically my question is, should I be rolling out one huge table with all of the data or should I be creating a project table and then multiple category table with a 1-to-1 relationship? My gut is telling me to go with a single table, but at the same time I have never needed to create such a big table and it feels wrong! Thank you for your enlightenment on the subject. QB |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Proper Table(s) Layout
QB wrote:
I have created a couple of Dbs which the table structure seemed to simply fall into place, it was just logical in my head. That said, I am working on a new db and for some reason I am doubting myself and wanted a second opinion. The db is basically a contract db to input all the info, and there is a lot of info, for each contract. Where I am 'lost' is the fact that the contracts are broken into categories: clients, components,engineering, warantee... For all of the components (with the exception of clients) there are a number of fields but only 1 entry per contract. Basically my question is, should I be rolling out one huge table with all of the data or should I be creating a project table and then multiple category table with a 1-to-1 relationship? My gut is telling me to go with a single table, but at the same time I have never needed to create such a big table and it feels wrong! Definitely one main table and several 1-1 tables. Basically, this is subclassing. There's an article on Access Web that explains how to do it... http://www.mvps.org/access/tables/tbl0013.htm -- Message posted via http://www.accessmonster.com |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Proper Table(s) Layout
I'm with Dorian ...
Any time you build a "large" (i.e., wide) table, you risk having to maintain it (i.e., fix it), and any related queries, forms, reports, code, etc. Even though it means more work now, normalizing your data structure at the beginning makes for less work ongoing. Pay now or pay later! Good luck! Regards Jeff Boyce Microsoft Access MVP -- Disclaimer: This author may have received products and services mentioned in this post. Mention and/or description of a product or service herein does not constitute endorsement thereof. Any code or pseudocode included in this post is offered "as is", with no guarantee as to suitability. You can thank the FTC of the USA for making this disclaimer possible/necessary. "QB" wrote in message ... I have created a couple of Dbs which the table structure seemed to simply fall into place, it was just logical in my head. That said, I am working on a new db and for some reason I am doubting myself and wanted a second opinion. The db is basically a contract db to input all the info, and there is a lot of info, for each contract. Where I am 'lost' is the fact that the contracts are broken into categories: clients, components,engineering, warantee... For all of the components (with the exception of clients) there are a number of fields but only 1 entry per contract. Basically my question is, should I be rolling out one huge table with all of the data or should I be creating a project table and then multiple category table with a 1-to-1 relationship? My gut is telling me to go with a single table, but at the same time I have never needed to create such a big table and it feels wrong! Thank you for your enlightenment on the subject. QB |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|