Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    17

    Post Please comment this!!!

    Hi there!

    I would be very grateful if you could comment the attached db-model..

    Its a school-project. Its about a marketing-company that needs to get
    control over their interviewers.

    The interviewers inform the company about which days they can work next week
    (the company always schedule its interviewers one week ahead).

    The interviewers wishes are saved in the WeekSchedule-table (see the attached file).

    From the wishes, a supervisor determines who shall be allowed to work -
    implemented by a boolean variable Allowed (see the attached file).

    Each morning a Supervisor combines the allowed workers that day with
    a certain working-project. This happends in the DaySchedule-table (see the attached file).

    Because the company each month shall be able to calculate an employees
    salary, the employees worked hours must be stored. This happends in the
    Worked-table. The Interviews-attribute is for the company to be able
    to show an employee how many interviews he or she has done that month.

    Ok....what do you think....I hope that all tables satisfy the third normal form..

    please tell me otherwise...

    All comments welcome!!!!!!!!

    Thanks!!!!!

    /Marcus
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails skicka.jpg  

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    20,002
    by looking only at the PKs, it seems you can fold BankInformation and Login tables into the employee table, and Worked table into the DaySchedule table
    rudy.ca | @rudydotca
    Buy my SitePoint book: Simply SQL

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    17

    Red face Thanks!

    Thanks r937!

    Jepp now when you say it - I agree!.... As you can understand I'm a newbie on the interesting database-subject....I don't know why I made certain tables for those things...perhaps because I thougth it looked nice (which isn't reason enough =)

    There isn't any advantages of making any of the "unnecessary tables" I made?

    New tables shall only be made when I want to reach a certain normalisation that can't be reached otherwise?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    20,002
    a new table for each new one-to-many or many-to-many relationship
    rudy.ca | @rudydotca
    Buy my SitePoint book: Simply SQL

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    17

    Smile Thanks!

    Thanks again r937!

    Everything you say really make sense...

    /Marcus

Posting Permissions

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