Re: Database Design - Tricky

I guess I didn't state the problem clearly. C is in a many-to-many relationship with NEWS. So is R and B.

Van

Jacques Desmazieres <nospam.jacques.desmazieres_at_is2france.com> wrote in message news:oy_d5.181$0d5.283669_at_nnrp1.proxad.net...
> If I have well understood your issue:
>
> Actually you can do this without the intersection table by adding the
> NEWSKEY in the C, R, B table as a foreign key. So if you want to add a new
> table at R,B,C level, you do not need to change anything in the SQL
> accessing the existing tables, and you do not need to create any extra
> table.
> But this needs to amend the R,B,C existing tables.
>
> Jacques Desmazieres
>
> "Van Messner" <vmessnerNOvmSPAM_at_discovernet.com.invalid> wrote in message
> news:279730c0.91eee10f_at_usw-ex0106-046.remarq.com...
> > Imagine three tables C, R and B. C has a primary key of CKEY, R
> > is RKEY and B is BKEY.
> >
> > Another table NEWS has a primary key of NEWSKEY.
> >
> > C, R and B can all be associated with zero to many NEWS items.
> > Any NEWS item can be associated with C and/or R and/or B.
> >
> > One model is to put an intersection table between NEWS and C,
> > NEWS and B, and NEWS and R.
> >
> > But when I add more tables at the level of C, R and B then I will
> > need more intersection tables. Is there a more elegant solution?
> > Please be specific about which would be the key and foreign key
> > columns of any alternative solution.
> >
> > Many thanks,
> >
> > Van
> >
> >
> >
> > -----------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Got questions? Get answers over the phone at Keen.com.
> > Up to 100 minutes free!
> > http://www.keen.com
> >
>
>
Received on Sat Jul 22 2000 - 00:00:00 CDT