Table Structure

[Chimp8471]

Can Someone have a look at my attached DB and see if the following are correct please:

relationships are correct
It's Normalised
I have the correct fields as PK & FK

Any suggestions to improve or rectify this would be welcome.

please help i need to have this sorted by today (Only the table structure)

cheers

Andy

 

[Kraj]

Chimp -

I am actually quite curious to know what opinion the others will have on this. Personally I feel most of your tables are unncessary; they contain only one data field and a primary key. While this does not violate 1st, 2nd, or 3rd normal form it would not violate them to simply put the values in the original table either.

For example, the memory table contains only memory ID and then 64, 128, 256, and 512 for data. Then the original table stores the memory ID. Why not simply store the amount of memory in the original table? As it is, you have created a whole new table which will consume more system resources, simply to substitute one number for another.

On the other hand, the setup makes for extreme flexibility if the need arises to store information that would require those tables.

 

[Chimp8471]

ok once again i have had a play, and guess wot......PROBLEMS!!!!!!!!!

Hi i think i have had a play around with my tables again to try and sort this out....

however thare are some very funny results coming out......

I have set up my workstation data and set all the memory specs to 128 meg..

yet when i go to my table for memory.....and click on the (+) on the left hand side and expand the field, along side 128 mb, i thought i should have the 4 machines listed. but i have none in there....

this is pretty much the same for most tables and data....

another example is the technicians table only shows them being assigned 3 jobs when there jhave been 5.

the operator table displays no records on the expand list, yet operator one has taken 5 calls

please help......i really need a quick reply ...

Andy