I want to create one database which can handle daily deals provided by partners.Also i want to design it in such way so that database it self will not allow duplicate data by using combination of lat-long, name & date-time. As for now i have one provider but in future i might get deals from 2-3 different partners.
Is one table is enough for above requirement which will handle all the data.
I will really apreciate any comments/ suggestions or hints to get me start or push in right direction. Any type of reference info.
Please let me know if need some more information or i am not clear about any point...
Regards,
K
I would at first put the partners in a separate table, to store all their information. Then, the deals only need a partnerid. It is unclear to me what these deals are, and if you may need a separate table with product information, so a deal is actually a link between a product and a provider, for a given period of time.
In that case, you need three tables at least to store just the deals, apart from any orders and other information you might need.
But if you start modeling, it is strongly advised that you do some reading about database normalization. It will give you a guide to what you should store in which table.
http://databases.about.com/od/specificproducts/a/normalization.htm
Related
Being new to relational database design, I am trying to clarify one piece of information to properly design this database. Although I am using Filemaker as the platform, I believe this is a universal question.
Using the logic of ideally having all one to many relationships, and using separate tables or join tables to solve these.
I have a database with multiple products, made by multiple brands, in multiple product categories. I also want this to be as scale-able as possible when it comes to reporting, being able to slice and dice the data in as many ways as possible since the needs of the users are constantly changing.
So when I ask the question "Does each Brand have multiple products" I get a yes, and "Does each product have multiple brands" the answer is no. So this is a one to many relationship, but it also seems that a self-join table might give me everything that I need.
This methodology also seems to go down a rabbit hole for other "product related" information such as product category, each product is tied to one product category, but only one product category is related to a product.
So I see 2 possibilities, make three tables and join them with primary and foreign keys, one for Brand, one for Product Category, and one for Products.
Or the second possibility is to create one table that has the brand and product category and product info all in one table (since they are all product related) and simply do self-joins and other query based tables to give me the future reporting requirements that will be changing over time.
I am looking for input from experiences that might point me in the right direction.
Thanks in advance!
Could you ever want to store additional information about a brand (company URL, phone number, etc.) or about a product category (description, etc.)?
If the answer is yes, you definitely want to use three tables. If you don't, you'll be repeating all that information for every single item that belongs to the same brand or same category.
If the answer is no, there is still an advantage to using three tables - it will prevent typos or other spelling inconsistencies from getting into your database. For example, it would prevent you from writing a brand as "Coca Cola" for some items and as "Coca-Cola" for other items. These inconsistencies get harder and harder to find and correct as your database grows. By having each brand only listed once in it's own table, it will always be written the same way.
The disadvantage of multiple tables is the SQL for your queries is more complicated. There's definitely a tradeoff, but when in doubt, normalize into multiple tables. You'll learn when it's better to de-normalize with more experience.
I am not sure where do you see a room for a self-join here. It seems to me you are saying: I have a table of products; each product has one brand and one (?) category. If that's the case then you need either three tables:
Brands -< Products >- Categories
or - in Filemaker only - you can replace either or both the Brands and the Categories tables with a value list (assuming you won't be renaming brands/categories and at the expense of some reporting capabilities). So really it depends on what type of information you want to get out in the end.
If you truly want your solution to be scalable you need to parse and partition your data now. Otherwise you will be faced with the re-structuring of the solution down the road when the solution grows in size. You will also be faced with parsing and relocating the data to new tables. Since you've also included the SQL and MySQL tags if you plan on connecting Filemaker to an external data source then you will definitely need to up your game structurally.
Building everything in one table is essentially using Filemaker to do Excel work and it won't cut it if you are connecting to SQL, MySQL, etc.
Self join tables are a great tool. However, they should really only be used for calculating small data points and should not be used as pivot points or foundations for your reporting features. It can grow out of control as time goes on and you need to keep your backend clean.
Use summary and sub-summary reporting features to slice product based data.
For retail and general product management solutions, whether it's Filemaker/SQL/or whatever the "Brand" or "Vendor" is it's own table. Then you would have a "Products" table (the match key being the "Brand ID").
The "Product Category" field should be a field in the "Products" table. You can manage the category values by building a standard value list or building a value list based on a "Product Category" table. The second scenario is better for long term administration.
I use access to store concert registration information at the non-profit I currently work at. I have it set up so that I dump all of the patron contact information into one table, and all of the concert registration information into another. when we change our concert season, I simply copy/paste the "2012-13 concert registration table" and rename it the "2013-14" concert registration table".
the concert registration table serves as my "hub" for all my other information. I have about a half-dozen summary queries that show information for specific concerts, who I still need to collect payment for etc. as well as many Word mail merges associated with each document. This setup works great, except that every season I need to go in and re-link all of the queries and word docs to the new registration table
I will be leaving my job at the end of next month, and I would like to make the database more user-friendly, especially since I am fairly certain that my replacement will have zero familiarity with access. my questions are:
1) Is there a more elegant, easy way to transition from season to season other than to create a new registration table and subsequent queries from year-to-year?
2) How can I idiot-proof this database for the new person when I'm gone? I'm scared that if I create an extensive "how-to" guide, it simply won't be read and the person will be forced to reinvent the wheel. I'm toying with creating a switchboard, but I'm scared that this will make the database seem more unapproachable.
Thank you for your insight, happy to clarify if there are any questions!
Just make 1 table. Call it "registration table" and add a new field called Season. Your queries will be include a filter for that field. Then you won't need to relink your queries, copy tables, etc.
For an example, say you have a query to pull all the information from that table for a particular season. It might look something like:
Select * from RegistrationTable where Season=[What Season];
When run, the query will prompt the user for the season and pull only that data.
Also, I do recommend the "how-to" guide. There's probably a lot of manual manipulation of the database that you do and don't even think about. And if nothing else, you can always say you gave them documentation and thus provided for your successor.
I am making a database that is for employee scheduling. I am, for the first time ever, making a relational mySQL database so that I can efficiently manage all of the data. I have been using the mySQL Workbench program to help me visualize how this is going to go. Here is what I have so far:
What I have pictured in my head is that, based on the drawing, I would set the schedule in the schedule table which uses references from the other tables as shown. Then when I need to display this schedule, I would pull everything from the schedule table. Whenever I've worked with a database in the past, it hasn't been of the normalized type, so I would just enter the data into one table and then pull the data out from that one table. Now that I'm tackling a much larger project I am sure that having all of the tables split (normalized) like this is the way to go, but I'm having trouble seeing how everything comes together in the end. I have a feeling it doesn't work the way I have it pictured, #grossvogel pointed out what I believe to be something critical to making this all work and that is to use the join function to pull the data.
The reason I started with a relational database was so that if I made a change to (for example) the shift table and instead of record 1 being "AM" I wanted it to be "Morning", it would then automatically change the relevant sections through the cascade option.
The reason I'm posting this here is because I am hoping someone can help fill in the blanks and to point me in the right direction so I don't spend a lot of hours only to find out I made a wrong turn at the beginning.
Maybe the piece you're missing is the idea of using a query with joins to pull in data from multiple tables. For instance (just incorporating a couple of your tables):
SELECT Dept_Name, Emp_Name, Stat_Name ...
FROM schedule
INNER JOIN departments on schedule.Dept_ID = departments.Dept_ID
INNER JOIN employees on schedule.Emp_ID = employees.Emp_ID
INNER JOIN status on schedule.Stat_ID = status.Stat_ID
...
where ....
Note also that a schedule table that contains all of the information needed to be displayed on the final page is not in the spirit of relational data modeling. You want each table to model some entity in your application, so it might be more appropriate to rename schedule to something like shifts if each row represents a shift. (I usually use singular names for tables, but there are multiple perspectives there.)
This is, frankly, a very difficult question to answer because you could get a million different answers, each with their own merits. I'd suggest you take a look at these (there are probably better links out there too, these just seemed like good points to note) :
http://www.devshed.com/c/a/MySQL/Designing-a-MySQL-Database-Tips-and-Techniques/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boyce%E2%80%93Codd_normal_form
http://www.sitepoint.com/forums/showthread.php?66342-SQL-and-RDBMS-Database-Design-DO-s-and-DON-Ts
I'd also suggest you try explaining what it is you want to achieve in more detail rather than just post the table structure and let us try to figure out what you meant by what you've done.
Often by trying to explain something verbally you may come to the realisations you need without anyone else's input at all!
One thing I will mention is that you don't have to denormalise a table to report certain values together, you should be considering views for that kind of thing...
currently Im working on a project that, at first glance, will require many tables in a database. Most of the tables are fairly straightforward however I do have an issue. One of the tables will be a list of members for the website, things like username, password, contact info, bio, education, etc will be included. This is a simple design, however, there is also a need for each member to have their availability entered and store in the database as well. Availability is defined as a date and time range. Like available on 4/5/2011 from 1pm to 6pm EST, or NOT available every friday after 8pm EST. For a single user, this could be a table on its own, but for many users, Im not sure how to go about organizing the data in a manageable fashion. First thought would be to have code to create a table for each user, but that could mean alot of tables in the database in addition to the few I have for other site functions. Logically i could use the username appended to Avail_ or something for the table name ie: Avail_UserBob and then query that as needed. But im curious if anyone can think of a better option than having the potential of hundreds of tables in a single database.
edit
So general agreement would be to have a table for members, unique key being ID for instance. Then have a second table for availability (date, start time, end time, boolean for available or not, and id of member this applies to). Django might sound nice and work well, but i dont have the time to spend learning another framework while working on this project. The 2 table method seems plausable but Im worried about the extra coding required for features that will utilize the availability times to A) build a calender like page to add, edit, or remove entered values, and B) match availabilities with entries from another table that lists games. While I might have more coding, I can live with that as long as the database is sound, functional, and not so messy. Thanks for the input guys.
Not to sound like a troll, but you should take a look into using a web framework to build most of this for you. I'd suggest taking a look at Django. With it you can define the type of fields you wish to store (and how they relate) and Django builds all the SQL statements to make it so. You get a nice admin interface for free so staff can login and add/edit/etc.
You also don't have to worry about building the login/auth/change password, etc. forms. all that session stuff is taken care of by Django. You get to focus on what makes your project/app unique.
And it allow you to build your project really, really fast.
djangoproject.org
I don't have any other framework suggestions that meet your needs. I do... but I think Django will fit the bill.
Create a table to store users. Use its primary key as foreign key in other tables.
The databases are written to hold many many rows in a table. There are not optimized for table creation. So it is not a good idea to create a new table for each user. Instead give each user an unique identifier and put the availability in a separate table. Provide an additional flag to make an entry valid or invalid.
Create a table of users; then create a table of availabilities per user. Don't try to cram availabilities into the user table: that will guarantee giant grief for you later on; and you'll find you have to create an availabilities table then.
Google database normalization to get an idea why.
Take it as truth from one who has suffered such self-inflicted grief :-)
I am trying to design a database for my web app. The idea is that customers can come on and sell cars that are already listed in the database. Then there will be a list of offers made by other users on the cars.
Just looking for some advice really, not sure if my db design would work correctly?
also, for sale history, would i be better adding anouther table? or making a query to find sales with an offer with status (sold)?
Thanks
I have already written on comments but let me put them all together.
1) If you need some kind of history you would really want to throw some "created_at" datetime's on both carsforsale and offers.
2) putting a status on carsforsale would save you a lot of trouble when querying.
3) I see a balance in users table, would it change when user makes an offer? If not you would better invalidate the status of every offer when a car is sold (would be simpler with #2)
Offers table probably needs to have a userid to show who made the offer.