Re: many to many relationship
From: Pablo Sanchez <pablo_at_dev.null>
Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2003 07:32:48 -0600
Message-ID: <Xns93364299438C0pingottpingottbah_at_216.166.71.233>
Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2003 07:32:48 -0600
Message-ID: <Xns93364299438C0pingottpingottbah_at_216.166.71.233>
"Paul Vernon" <paul.vernon_at_ukk.ibmm.comm> wrote in news:b478s6$1h5m$2
_at_sp15at20.hursley.ibm.com:
> All of which is an argument against the usefulness of the ER model's
FWIW,
I always go directly to the physical model. After all, the folks who
typically consume the model are developers. The businessness folks do
the 'sign-off' and they're easily 'trained' to read the physical
model. :)
> many-to-many relationships idea. In this case, was the ER model
> clearer without an explicit 'enrollement' entity?
--
Pablo Sanchez, High-Performance Database Engineering
http://www.hpdbe.com
Received on Thu Mar 06 2003 - 14:32:48 CET