Data Rules Violations
in [Tables]
|
Prev: how do I insert a hyperlink in my access database design?
Next: help transition to access from excel - stevie PIMPS again
From: Jeff Boyce on 8 Mar 2010 16:10 Sorry, I didn't see answers to the questions ... I asked them to get clarification. Regards Jeff Boyce Microsoft Access MVP -- Disclaimer: This author may have received products and services mentioned in this post. Mention and/or description of a product or service herein does not constitute endorsement thereof. Any code or pseudocode included in this post is offered "as is", with no guarantee as to suitability. You can thank the FTC of the USA for making this disclaimer possible/necessary. "John Quinn" <JohnQuinn(a)discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:B65A3C2D-8731-4FEC-A0B6-7B28C6639785(a)microsoft.com... > The legal community for the Department of Education is now requiring a > weekly > account of all the students we test and grade. I move the infor to the > SQL > database in the event of a law suit by the parents. > > Thanks for getting back! > > Hope this gives you an understanding of what we face in education. > > John Q. > > "Jeff Boyce" wrote: > >> John >> >> What "historical table"? If it truly is historical info only, why are >> you >> "updating" it? >> >> How do you know that there are 7? >> >> Do you know which field(s) contain the bad info? >> >> Does "bad" = corrupted, or does "bad" = inaccurate? >> >> More info, please... >> >> Regards >> >> Jeff Boyce >> Microsoft Access MVP >> >> -- >> Disclaimer: This author may have received products and services mentioned >> in this post. Mention and/or description of a product or service herein >> does not constitute endorsement thereof. >> >> Any code or pseudocode included in this post is offered "as is", with no >> guarantee as to suitability. >> >> You can thank the FTC of the USA for making this disclaimer >> possible/necessary. >> >> "John Quinn" <JohnQuinn(a)discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message >> news:B528A571-73CD-4B16-B238-6CB3987701A8(a)microsoft.com... >> >I have a table of 19,000 records with about 225 fields in each record. >> >It >> >is >> > not an indexed table, just a table of educational transactions. >> > >> > Some how when I go to update the historical table seven (7) records >> > have >> > gotten some bad info in them. I know I can copy the table to another >> > database and look at them one field at a time, but this will take >> > forever. >> > >> > Does anyone know a quick method of finding the seven bad records? >> > >> > Thanks in Advance >> > >> > John Q >> > >> >> >> . >>
From: J_Goddard via AccessMonster.com on 8 Mar 2010 16:23 If any one of the records in the table pertain to more than one subject, then it is not properly normalized (i.e. designed). If you have groups of fields that repeat, for example grade1, source1, approval1, grade2, source2, approval2.... then it is not normalized at all. Looking at your description (if I read it right, that all this is in one table), then you do have that situation: for each student, in each subject, there are many scores. The scores in turn have fields for reviewer, approval, suggestions,.... Given this, "Scores" requires its own table, with a PK of Student_ID, Subject_ID, Score_ID, plus all the other data. They may well be more tables that would result if you do the complete normalization process, and the complexity might (and that's a big *might*!) not be as much as you think. HTH John John Quinn wrote: >It is a sequence of information and approvals for each subject, grade, >homework and tests. > >If a student is taking English then we need to show all scorces given and >the relationship to the previous grad or score. With each entry you must >always carrt fields of data for who reviewed it, approved it, made >suggestions or rejected the educational technique used. There is also a >comparison made to grades when the student goes into the next level of >education. For example from grade school to middles school, from middle >school to junior high and from junior high to college. > >We even have to know that the student entered college and if that student >graduated or not. > >The designers at Fort Hood, indicated iot was the toughest applications they >have ever seen. Microsoft consultants were amazed at what the attorney's in >Washington DC want us to keep an accounting of. > >The bad data message comes from an append query. The tables are suppose to >be identical but for some reason this happens once in a while. I eventually >find out where the problem is, but it takes so long. > >Thanks for the interest. > >John Q. > >> Hi - >> >[quoted text clipped - 22 lines] >> > >> >John Q -- John Goddard Ottawa, ON Canada jrgoddard at cyberus dot ca Message posted via AccessMonster.com http://www.accessmonster.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/access-tablesdbdesign/201003/1
From: Jeff Boyce on 8 Mar 2010 18:16 You may be asking yourself why would you care? Why bother with "normalization"? MS Access is a relational database. It's features and functions are optimized for well-normalized data. If you try to feed it 'sheet data, both you and Access will have to work overtime to overcome that 'sheet data structure. Good luck! Regards Jeff Boyce Microsoft Access MVP -- Disclaimer: This author may have received products and services mentioned in this post. Mention and/or description of a product or service herein does not constitute endorsement thereof. Any code or pseudocode included in this post is offered "as is", with no guarantee as to suitability. You can thank the FTC of the USA for making this disclaimer possible/necessary. "J_Goddard via AccessMonster.com" <u37558(a)uwe> wrote in message news:a4b7fe09ac16b(a)uwe... > If any one of the records in the table pertain to more than one subject, > then > it is not properly normalized (i.e. designed). If you have groups of > fields > that repeat, for example grade1, source1, approval1, grade2, source2, > approval2.... then it is not normalized at all. > > Looking at your description (if I read it right, that all this is in one > table), then you do have that situation: for each student, in each > subject, > there are many scores. The scores in turn have fields for reviewer, > approval, > suggestions,.... Given this, "Scores" requires its own table, with a PK > of > Student_ID, Subject_ID, Score_ID, plus all the other data. > > They may well be more tables that would result if you do the complete > normalization process, and the complexity might (and that's a big > *might*!) > not be as much as you think. > > HTH > > John > > > > > John Quinn wrote: >>It is a sequence of information and approvals for each subject, grade, >>homework and tests. >> >>If a student is taking English then we need to show all scorces given and >>the relationship to the previous grad or score. With each entry you must >>always carrt fields of data for who reviewed it, approved it, made >>suggestions or rejected the educational technique used. There is also a >>comparison made to grades when the student goes into the next level of >>education. For example from grade school to middles school, from middle >>school to junior high and from junior high to college. >> >>We even have to know that the student entered college and if that student >>graduated or not. >> >>The designers at Fort Hood, indicated iot was the toughest applications >>they >>have ever seen. Microsoft consultants were amazed at what the attorney's >>in >>Washington DC want us to keep an accounting of. >> >>The bad data message comes from an append query. The tables are suppose >>to >>be identical but for some reason this happens once in a while. I >>eventually >>find out where the problem is, but it takes so long. >> >>Thanks for the interest. >> >>John Q. >> >>> Hi - >>> >>[quoted text clipped - 22 lines] >>> > >>> >John Q > > -- > John Goddard > Ottawa, ON Canada > jrgoddard at cyberus dot ca > > Message posted via AccessMonster.com > http://www.accessmonster.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/access-tablesdbdesign/201003/1 >
From: Steve on 8 Mar 2010 19:44
John, From your description here, your application is not so tough (complex maybe and requiring many tables). What makes your application problematic is the table with 225 fields. When you run the append query, something is highly likely to go wrong at some point in time due to the complexity of the data in the 225 field table. Your tables need to be normalized. What you will probably end up with are a set of less than fifty tables where all tables are less than ten fields. Based on your description here, you have students who progress through grades 1 to 12 and some may go on to college. In each grade they take certain subjects. In each subject in each grade they do homework and take tests. The students are given grades for their homework and tests. Apparently there is some review and approval process. Comparison of grades when the student goes into the next level of education is a simple query or series of queries. The data returned by any query can be displayed on the screen in a form or printed out in a report. You say when a problem occurs you eventually find out where the problem is, but it takes so long. There's a very strong possibility that a well designed set of tables would eliminate the problem you are seeing. Even if it doesn't totally eliminate the problem, when a problem occurred, it would take far less time to find where the problem is. Steve santus(a)penn.com "John Quinn" <JohnQuinn(a)discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:46686063-DE52-4924-A397-CD1F96C82F74(a)microsoft.com... > It is a sequence of information and approvals for each subject, grade, > homework and tests. > > If a student is taking English then we need to show all scorces given and > the relationship to the previous grad or score. With each entry you must > always carrt fields of data for who reviewed it, approved it, made > suggestions or rejected the educational technique used. There is also a > comparison made to grades when the student goes into the next level of > education. For example from grade school to middles school, from middle > school to junior high and from junior high to college. > > We even have to know that the student entered college and if that student > graduated or not. > > The designers at Fort Hood, indicated iot was the toughest applications > they > have ever seen. Microsoft consultants were amazed at what the attorney's > in > Washington DC want us to keep an accounting of. > > The bad data message comes from an append query. The tables are suppose > to > be identical but for some reason this happens once in a while. I > eventually > find out where the problem is, but it takes so long. > > Thanks for the interest. > > John Q. > > "J_Goddard via AccessMonster.com" wrote: > >> Hi - >> >> How did you determine that 7 records had 'bad' data? Did MS Access give >> you >> an error message on a >> data import, or did you just happen to notice the bad data? If the 'bad' >> data is actually in the tables, then it is not likely to be a problem >> with MS >> Access - more likely to be a problem with the source of the data. >> >> As has been pointed out, 225 fields is a REALLY large table - can you >> give us >> an idea of what it contains? It might be that there is a much more >> efficient >> way of reaching your goal. >> >> John >> >> >> John Quinn wrote: >> >I have a table of 19,000 records with about 225 fields in each record. >> >It is >> >not an indexed table, just a table of educational transactions. >> > >> >Some how when I go to update the historical table seven (7) records have >> >gotten some bad info in them. I know I can copy the table to another >> >database and look at them one field at a time, but this will take >> >forever. >> > >> >Does anyone know a quick method of finding the seven bad records? >> > >> >Thanks in Advance >> > >> >John Q >> >> -- >> John Goddard >> Ottawa, ON Canada >> jrgoddard at cyberus dot ca >> >> Message posted via http://www.accessmonster.com >> >> . >> |