Re: Complicated query
From: Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex_at_attglobal.net>
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 23:01:34 -0500
Message-ID: <m6oaqa$1ur$1_at_dont-email.me>
>>
>> On Tue, 16 Dec 2014 08:41:16 +1100, Geoff Muldoon wrote:
>>
>>> sheldonlg_at_thevillages.net says...
>>>> ...and you don't know what you are talking about. There is ONE row
>>> column each!
>> It's his use of the words "questions" and "answers" which are causing
>> upset, or rather other people's preconceived interpretations of what
>> exactly questions and answers mean.
>>
>> Think of the questions as being:
>>
>> title?
>> firstname?
>> lastname?
>> dateOfBirth?
>> height?
>> weight?
>> hair colour?
>> eye colour?
>> nationality?
>> ethnicity?
>> sexuality?
>> gender?
>> relationshipStatus?
>> employmentStatus?
>> ......
>>
>> Then it makes perfect sense, for each instance (person) to have 1 record
>> with all their answers in it.
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 23:01:34 -0500
Message-ID: <m6oaqa$1ur$1_at_dont-email.me>
On 12/15/2014 10:26 PM, Geoff Muldoon wrote:
> In article <m6nug0$lfq$3_at_dont-email.me>, denismfmcmahon_at_gmail.com > says...
>>
>> On Tue, 16 Dec 2014 08:41:16 +1100, Geoff Muldoon wrote:
>>
>>> sheldonlg_at_thevillages.net says...
>
>>>> ...and you don't know what you are talking about. There is ONE row
> for>>> "logic" I don't really need a STAFF table, as I can just put them in one
>>>> each instance and 18 columns, ONE column for ONE answer to each of the
>>>> 18 DIFFERENT questions for THAT instance --- in the design that the
>>>> person (philosopher??) suggested as a single table, NOT the actual
>>>> design that I was working with.
>>>
>>> Hey, I have 18 different people working in my team. So under your
>>> column each!
>
>> It's his use of the words "questions" and "answers" which are causing
> the
>> upset, or rather other people's preconceived interpretations of what
>> exactly questions and answers mean.
>>
>> Think of the questions as being:
>>
>> title?
>> firstname?
>> lastname?
>> dateOfBirth?
>> height?
>> weight?
>> hair colour?
>> eye colour?
>> nationality?
>> ethnicity?
>> sexuality?
>> gender?
>> relationshipStatus?
>> employmentStatus?
>> ......
>>
>> Then it makes perfect sense, for each instance (person) to have 1 record
>> with all their answers in it.
> > These are not "questions", they are ATTRIBUTES. A person can (at any > one time) only have one height, one weight. > > But you are right in that unless we are privy to the OPs entity- > relationship model, we are just making assumptions. Including as to > whether any E-R analysis has even been done. Which I doubt. > > GM >
Geoff, actually I think one was done. Note the OP said someone else designed the database, and from his brief description of the database, it looks to have been properly normalized.
-- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle jstucklex_at_attglobal.net ==================Received on Tue Dec 16 2014 - 05:01:34 CET