Re: One to One Relationship

Wayne Hinch wrote:

> OK OK you two i am learning from my mistakes because i am still a student at
> university.
>
> Wayne
>
> "Paul Brewer" <paul_at_paul.brewers.org.uk> wrote in message
> news:3e764605_2_at_mk-nntp-1.news.uk.worldonline.com...
> >
> > "DA Morgan" <damorgan_at_exxesolutions.com> wrote in message
> > news:3E75FB57.28F7E5B0_at_exxesolutions.com...
> > > Wayne Hinch wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > How can a one to one relationship between two tables be created in
> > Oracle
> > > > 9i?
> > > >
> > > > Any help will be much appricated.
> > > >
> > > > Wayne
> > >
> > > By ignoring the rules of normalization and deciding to turn a relational
> > > database into an electronic version of a bunch of 3x5 cards.
> > >
> > > You can do it with constraints. You can do it with triggers. And you can
> > > decide to be smart and not do it at all. Get a book on relational
> database
> > > theory and normalization and read it.
> > >
> > Well said, Daniel.
> >
> > Wayne, what he's driving at is that logically it's the same damn table!.
> >
> > Sort out the logical model first. THEN worry about the physical
> > implementation. And if a fraction of the crappy software developers out
> > there paid any attention to this, their customers would have a sight less
> > need to pay us DBA's to sort the resultant mess out.
> >
> > So I don't mind, really!
> >
> > Regards,
> > Paul
> >
> >
> >

No need to be defensive ... I teach students at a university ... http://www.outreach.washington.edu/extinfo/certprog/oad/oad_crs.asp and certainly understand.

A 1:1 relationship is logically a single table ... so physically it should also be one table.

Daniel Morgan Received on Mon Mar 17 2003 - 17:30:20 CST