November 11, 2009 at 8:26 am
There is a table called DesignLogo and it has the clolumns -
DesignLogo
DesignNumber (PK)
LogoName
LogoPrice
LogoCost
SalesRep (FK)
There is another table called SalesRepTable
SalesRepTable
SalesRepNumber(PK)
Now the developer wants to change the relationship so that a design number can be used for multiple Sales reps. So I suggested breaking up the DesignLogo table and creating two new tables - DesignNumber and DeisgnToSales. So the total tables will be like -
DesignNumnber
Designnumber(PK)
SalesRepTable
SalesRepNumber(PK)
Logo
LogoName(PK)
LogoPrice
LogoCost
DesignNumber (FK)
DesignToSales
SalesRepNumber (PK)
DesignNumber(PK)
Now we can create a relationship with sales rep to a design number and then to a Logo from a design number. Does that seem correct? I am a newbie in database design.
Thank you in advance.
November 11, 2009 at 8:45 am
Seems kind of odd having a table with just an ID column in it, but it looks correct in this case.
That looks like the right design for what you've described.
- Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
Property of The Thread
"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon
November 12, 2009 at 6:20 am
I would just remove SalesRep from the DesignLogo table and create an intersection table (I like to call them glue tables) with DesignNumber and SalesRepNumber, unless you have more information that ties to a design than the number.
Jack Corbett
Consultant - Straight Path Solutions
Check out these links on how to get faster and more accurate answers:
Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
Need an Answer? Actually, No ... You Need a Question
Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply