Hi!

I have set myself a task which is absolutely massive

Having identified a massive loophole in the availability of information for my former trade, and having time but not money on my hands, I have gathered together a large amount of the information that is needed, and am now ready to start putting it into a database.

I've read umpteen books on databases, and have dabbled in mysql and php aswell as html, and have my pc set up as an apache server with php etc enabled.

The problem I have is that I really dont understand properly how relationships work, and the elements I will need to link - I'm not even sure how far to go with the table creation, ie., how to split the data for best effeciency; In other words it is the modelling and basic layout/relationships that I am struggling with!

So the big question is....... is there anyone here who is fully conversant with complex databases who would be prepared to give me a hand to get started please? Let me give a little info about the complexity of this so that there is at least some sort of guide as to what is required.

The database will contain:
Manufacturers, distributors, retailers and contractors(all with addresses etc).
Product ranges - around 20 range types, some with thousands of items, and some of those further sub-divided for variants.
public access to certain areas, and password control for various trade users to access relevant levels.

That is the nuts and bolts of it, and although it may look simple, the sheer volume of data that I need to input means that this is a massive task that I need to get set up correctly from the start. I intend to build the database off-line, and when I am ready for it to go public will probably get my own server, though I suspect that is probably 12 - 18 months away.

I have tried to give a good outline of the basics, and where my problems are; I dont anticipate any major problems in actually creating the tables or the query structures as I do understand enough to create a table and input the data. I simply need a decent model that I can then populate.....I think


Thank you for reading my post.

Paul

Hi Paul and welcome to the forums!

You've certainly joined the right place if you want to learn more about this stuff - I'm sure many of the community members will help you out with any questions when they can

Now then, the first thing I reckon you should do is read this article thoroughly - then do it again, and then a third time for good measure (seriously!) and then have a sit down and think in lamens terms how to define your attributes, and then (only then) begin to define your relationships (please post back any progress you make for comments and feedback!).

Don't try and do too much at once, you can't start building a house until the foundations are solid!

Good luck!

P.S. thread moved to Database Concepts and Design topic

thanks georgev for the welcome and encouragement!

I have actually read the item a couple of times already - clearly I still need to read it more! It is unusual for me not to grasp an idea, especially when it is something I want to do; but I'm just not getting this relationships thing. Will keep plugging on, and let you know how I progress.

Cheers

Paul

Define your attributes and post them back her

sorry georgev, you've confused me already!
what attributes do you want defined - I have sketched out roughly how I need to construct the database, but am not sure what you are calling attributes?

thanks

Paul

Domino, he is talking about the fields within your table.
Hope that helps.

thanks fjm1967, I did wonder if that was what georgev meant, but thought I'd better check before making a fool of myself!

I'll have to list them all out, and then come back

Thanks guys

Don't worry about making a fool out of yourself here; I do it all the time.

Sorry, didn't mean to cause any confusion!

...but here's some more.
I actually meant "entities"

An employee is an entity
Salary is an attribute of an employee

Domino, don't believe that, that is his role here in the forums. He is also known as confucius

I had to look up confucius... I still don't get the reference

todd, it's a play on words

in this case, it plays on "confucius" being similar to "confusion"

I thought he was calling me a philosopher

Rudy was right. It was just a play on words.