Re: Complicated query
From: Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex_at_attglobal.net>
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2014 22:51:56 -0500
Message-ID: <m6doob$hna$1_at_dont-email.me>
>>> On 12/9/2014 7:15 PM, Denis McMahon wrote:
>>> How is this non-normalized? You would label each of the answer fields
>>> with a unique name that illustrates the question to which it is an
>>> answer. You would then eliminate the question table entirely, unless
>>> you want to keep it with both the expanded question and the name of the
>>> field in the instance table for which it corresponds. In that table,
>>> the name would then be the foreign key. Since this only is to be used
>>> is designing the html user interface, it is really not needed as you
>>> could simply add the text explicitly. Thus you are down to only one
>>> table that is needed -- the instance table -- with n unique fields.
>>> So, pray tell, how is that non-normalized? Where is the redundancy? To
>>> what other tables need something here be propagated (none!).
>>> No, sir, it is not non-normalized. The "normalization" that exists now
>>> is an unnecessary complication.
>>> He was giving a short-hand. He *obviously* meant
>>> ID Instance-item-1 Instance-Item-2 (etc.) Question Achoice Bchoice
>>> Cchoice Dchoice (etc.)
>>> Apparently that was beyond your grasp.
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2014 22:51:56 -0500
Message-ID: <m6doob$hna$1_at_dont-email.me>
On 12/11/2014 2:14 PM, Shelly wrote:
> On 12/11/2014 1:55 PM, Jerry Stuckle wrote: >> On 12/11/2014 12:33 PM, Shelly wrote:
>>> On 12/9/2014 7:15 PM, Denis McMahon wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 08 Dec 2014 22:00:57 -0500, Shelly wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 12/7/2014 12:05 PM, richard wrote: >>>> >>>>>> I know this will piss off normalized Jerry Stuckle, but I'd just as >>>>>> soon use one table. >>>>>> Columns would be ID Question Achoice Bchoice Cchoice Dchoice Correct >>>>>> >>>>>> Now all you need to do is retrieve the row for each ID as needed. >>>> >>>>> Of course, and if *I* had designed the table structures, that is >>>>> what I >>>>> would have done as well. >>>> >>>> You are kidding us, right? >>>> >>>> Are you seriously working with Oracle products and preaching non >>>> normalised database design? >>>
>>> How is this non-normalized? You would label each of the answer fields
>>> with a unique name that illustrates the question to which it is an
>>> answer. You would then eliminate the question table entirely, unless
>>> you want to keep it with both the expanded question and the name of the
>>> field in the instance table for which it corresponds. In that table,
>>> the name would then be the foreign key. Since this only is to be used
>>> is designing the html user interface, it is really not needed as you
>>> could simply add the text explicitly. Thus you are down to only one
>>> table that is needed -- the instance table -- with n unique fields.
>>>
>>> So, pray tell, how is that non-normalized? Where is the redundancy? To
>>> what other tables need something here be propagated (none!).
>>>
>>> No, sir, it is not non-normalized. The "normalization" that exists now
>>> is an unnecessary complication.
>>> >>>> >>>> Also you seem to have lost the instance information somewhere along the >>>> way. Hope that wasn't important. >>>
>>> He was giving a short-hand. He *obviously* meant
>>>
>>> ID Instance-item-1 Instance-Item-2 (etc.) Question Achoice Bchoice
>>> Cchoice Dchoice (etc.)
>>>
>>> Apparently that was beyond your grasp.
>>> >> >> Shelly, >> >> It is a violation of First Normal form: >> >> "A relation is in first normal form if the domain of each attribute >> contains only atomic values, and the value of each attribute contains >> only a single value from that domain." >> >> Having multiple answers in one row violates the "single value from that >> domain" (answers). > > No, it doesn't if the fields all refer to DIFFERENT questions. The fact > that they are all answers to questions is meaningless. They could just > as easily been "department", "location", "address", etc. as being > "answer to question 1", "answer to question 2", etc. > > You would be correct if the columns were multiple answers to the SAME > question. In that case it would be non-normalized. However, they are > not so it isn't non-normalized since each column refers to a totally > independent entity. >
No, the columns (not "fields") refer to different answers ("choices") to the question. It is a violation of first normal form.
-- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle jstucklex_at_attglobal.net ==================Received on Fri Dec 12 2014 - 04:51:56 CET