Re: Normalization Question
From: Tom Ivar Helbekkmo <tih+nr_at_eunetnorge.no>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 14:43:26 +0100
Message-ID: <86acqzkkn5.fsf_at_athene.hamartun.priv.no>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 14:43:26 +0100
Message-ID: <86acqzkkn5.fsf_at_athene.hamartun.priv.no>
pc <toledobythesea_at_oohay.moc> writes:
> in that case, what would be the point of the model?
If I understood Dawn correctly, exactly the same as before such a
change. The only difference would be that a one-to-one relationship
(from a referencing row attribute to a referenced row in another
table) could also be a one-to-many relationship, without introducing
an intermediate, two column, relationship table, simply by letting the
original referencing attribute hold multiple values.
Off-hand, I can't see why it wouldn't have worked.
-tih
-- Tom Ivar Helbekkmo, Senior System Administrator, EUnet Norway Hosting www.eunet.no T +47-22092958 M +47-93013940 F +47-22092901 FWD 484145Received on Mon Jan 24 2005 - 14:43:26 CET