Results 1 to 2 of 2
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2013

    Red face Unanswered: confused about a question bcnf

    The problems says to find violations for bcnf, but as far as i understand, some dependencies even violate 2nf and 3nf. I am confused . I will be so thankful if somebody helps me with solving even one of these four questions.
    consider a relation R(a, b, c, d, e, f). for each 1-4 dependencies specify which dependencies (if any) violate the bcnf then decompose the relation, as necessary, into collections of BCNF relations.
    1. AD → B, C → D, BC → A, B → D
    2. BC → E, C → AB, AF → CD
    3. ABF → D, CD → E, BD → A
    4. AB → D, BCD → EF, B → C

    deeply thankful for any help.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Provided Answers: 4
    We don't do people's homework here. But we are willing to help if you can show us that you have put some thought and effort in it.

    Show us what you got so far, and where you are in doubt. I'm sure you'll get help then.
    With kind regards . . . . . SQL Server 2000/2005/2012

    Grabel's Law: 2 is not equal to 3 -- not even for very large values of 2.
    Pat Phelan's Law: 2 very definitely CAN equal 3 -- in at least two programming languages

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts