Prev: How big a record size is too big from a performance standpoint
Next: Collecting form data offline
From: Gina Whipp on 30 Nov 2009 16:08
Steve,

I guess you missed this question then...

"Should I have an ObserverID fk in tblQuestion since each
observer must address all 20 questions with each observation?"

....that question is what I was replying to. I did not mention anything
about redesign or wrong tables. I did mention a table to join Observer and
AnswersToQuestions because of the question posted but I guess you missed
that also.

--
Gina Whipp

"I feel I have been denied critical, need to know, information!" - Tremors
II

http://www.regina-whipp.com/index_files/TipList.htm

"Steve" <notmyemail(a)address.com> wrote in message
news:eOESxwfcKHA.800(a)TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Firstly, the OP's tables are correctly designed. Why would you recommend
> he look at a survey database? Secondly, you said "You will need a *joiner*
> table. Again, the OP's tables are correctly designed. He doesn't need any
> more tables!!! Your recommendation was completely erroneous and would only
> serve to confuse the OP further.
>
>
> "Gina Whipp" <NotInterested(a)InViruses.com> wrote in message
> news:ONqe6pdcKHA.4724(a)TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> Steve,
>>
>> Huh? I never said the tables were wrong. DSmith has Questions that
>> don't change and therefore adding ObserverID to tblQuestions would be an
>> issue and not work properly. Why would that information be wrong? I
>> offered a survey database example that gives a wonderful example of how a
>> survey would set up AND gave an example of how you deal with questions
>> that don't change. And while that database might be confusing to you
>> let's give DSmith a change to examine and make that determination.
>>
>> --
>> Gina Whipp
>>
>> "I feel I have been denied critical, need to know, information!" -
>> Tremors II
>>
>> http://www.regina-whipp.com/index_files/TipList.htm
>>
>> "Steve" <notmyemail(a)address.com> wrote in message
>> news:ObK92PdcKHA.744(a)TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>> Ignore Ms. Whipp's response; it's wrong and will just confuse you more!
>>>
>>> Your tables are correct!!!!!
>>>
>>> Read my previous response and just connect the primary keys and foreign
>>> keys for your relationships. In other words, connect each fieldname
>>> ending in "ID" in a table with the same field name in the table that
>>> defines the details of that fieldname. For example, connect ObserverID
>>> in TblObservation to ObserverID in TblObserver.
>>>
>>> Steve
>>>
>>>
>>> "dsmith via AccessMonster.com" <u56186(a)uwe> wrote in message
>>> news:9fde7f6b399a5(a)uwe...
>>>> Thanks Steve and Gina
>>>> my table structure is below:
>>>> There are 20 questions that each observer must review each time they do
>>>> a
>>>> field observation. They must indicate the location of the observation
>>>> and the
>>>> results of the review, i.e. safe, at risk, or na. What should my
>>>> relationships be? I'm having problems getting the tables to relate to
>>>> each
>>>> other on my form. Should I have an ObserverID fk in tblQuestion since
>>>> each
>>>> observer must address all 20 questions with each observation?
>>>>
>>>> TblQuestion
>>>> QstnID
>>>> QstnText
>>>> QstnType
>>>>
>>>> TblObserver
>>>> ObserverID
>>>> FirstName
>>>> LastName
>>>> ObserverDept
>>>>
>>>> TblLocation
>>>> LocationID
>>>> Location
>>>>
>>>> TblObservation
>>>> ObservationID
>>>> ObservationDate
>>>> ObserverID
>>>>
>>>> TblLocationObservation
>>>> LocationObservationID
>>>> ObservationID
>>>> LocationID
>>>> QstnID
>>>> LocationObservation
>>>>
>>>> Steve wrote:
>>>>>I follow a standard when setting up tables. All tables begin with "Tbl"
>>>>>and
>>>>>the first field in the table has the name of the table followed by
>>>>>"ID". The
>>>>>data type is autonumber. This is the primary key of each record and
>>>>>identifies the table where the record is stored any time you see the
>>>>>field
>>>>>name in the database. In subsequent fields, I use the name of the first
>>>>>field in a table when referring to a record in another table. This
>>>>>(these)
>>>>>is (are) foreign keys. For example, In TblObservation, ObserverID is a
>>>>>foreign key and refers to a specific observer in TblObserver. In
>>>>>TblLocationObservation, ObservationID is a foreign key that relates a
>>>>>record
>>>>>to a specific observation in TblObservation. Thus you can have a list
>>>>>of
>>>>>safety observations by a specific observer on a specific date.
>>>>>LocationID In
>>>>>TblLocationObservation is a foreign key and refers to a specific
>>>>>location
>>>>>(maybe Dept X) in Tbllocation. ProcedureID In TblLocationObservation is
>>>>>a
>>>>>foreign key and refers to a specific Procedure (maybe Stair/Ladder Use)
>>>>>in
>>>>>TblProcedure.
>>>>>
>>>>>Steve
>>>>>santus(a)penn.com
>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks Steve,
>>>>>> I made some progress but I think I've managed to totally confuse
>>>>>> myself
>>>>>[quoted text clipped - 38 lines]
>>>>>>>> my
>>>>>>>> tables and how they relate. Can you help me?
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Message posted via http://www.accessmonster.com
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>


From: Steve on 30 Nov 2009 20:14
You missed the OP's question!!! He asked "What should my relationships be?"


"Gina Whipp" <NotInterested(a)InViruses.com> wrote in message
news:eTIl2EgcKHA.4708(a)TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Steve,
>
> I guess you missed this question then...
>
> "Should I have an ObserverID fk in tblQuestion since each
> observer must address all 20 questions with each observation?"
>
> ...that question is what I was replying to. I did not mention anything
> about redesign or wrong tables. I did mention a table to join Observer
> and AnswersToQuestions because of the question posted but I guess you
> missed that also.
>
> --
> Gina Whipp
>
> "I feel I have been denied critical, need to know, information!" - Tremors
> II
>
> http://www.regina-whipp.com/index_files/TipList.htm
>
> "Steve" <notmyemail(a)address.com> wrote in message
> news:eOESxwfcKHA.800(a)TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> Firstly, the OP's tables are correctly designed. Why would you recommend
>> he look at a survey database? Secondly, you said "You will need a
>> *joiner* table. Again, the OP's tables are correctly designed. He doesn't
>> need any more tables!!! Your recommendation was completely erroneous and
>> would only serve to confuse the OP further.
>>
>>
>> "Gina Whipp" <NotInterested(a)InViruses.com> wrote in message
>> news:ONqe6pdcKHA.4724(a)TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>> Steve,
>>>
>>> Huh? I never said the tables were wrong. DSmith has Questions that
>>> don't change and therefore adding ObserverID to tblQuestions would be an
>>> issue and not work properly. Why would that information be wrong? I
>>> offered a survey database example that gives a wonderful example of how
>>> a survey would set up AND gave an example of how you deal with questions
>>> that don't change. And while that database might be confusing to you
>>> let's give DSmith a change to examine and make that determination.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Gina Whipp
>>>
>>> "I feel I have been denied critical, need to know, information!" -
>>> Tremors II
>>>
>>> http://www.regina-whipp.com/index_files/TipList.htm
>>>
>>> "Steve" <notmyemail(a)address.com> wrote in message
>>> news:ObK92PdcKHA.744(a)TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>>> Ignore Ms. Whipp's response; it's wrong and will just confuse you more!
>>>>
>>>> Your tables are correct!!!!!
>>>>
>>>> Read my previous response and just connect the primary keys and foreign
>>>> keys for your relationships. In other words, connect each fieldname
>>>> ending in "ID" in a table with the same field name in the table that
>>>> defines the details of that fieldname. For example, connect ObserverID
>>>> in TblObservation to ObserverID in TblObserver.
>>>>
>>>> Steve
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "dsmith via AccessMonster.com" <u56186(a)uwe> wrote in message
>>>> news:9fde7f6b399a5(a)uwe...
>>>>> Thanks Steve and Gina
>>>>> my table structure is below:
>>>>> There are 20 questions that each observer must review each time they
>>>>> do a
>>>>> field observation. They must indicate the location of the observation
>>>>> and the
>>>>> results of the review, i.e. safe, at risk, or na. What should my
>>>>> relationships be? I'm having problems getting the tables to relate to
>>>>> each
>>>>> other on my form. Should I have an ObserverID fk in tblQuestion since
>>>>> each
>>>>> observer must address all 20 questions with each observation?
>>>>>
>>>>> TblQuestion
>>>>> QstnID
>>>>> QstnText
>>>>> QstnType
>>>>>
>>>>> TblObserver
>>>>> ObserverID
>>>>> FirstName
>>>>> LastName
>>>>> ObserverDept
>>>>>
>>>>> TblLocation
>>>>> LocationID
>>>>> Location
>>>>>
>>>>> TblObservation
>>>>> ObservationID
>>>>> ObservationDate
>>>>> ObserverID
>>>>>
>>>>> TblLocationObservation
>>>>> LocationObservationID
>>>>> ObservationID
>>>>> LocationID
>>>>> QstnID
>>>>> LocationObservation
>>>>>
>>>>> Steve wrote:
>>>>>>I follow a standard when setting up tables. All tables begin with
>>>>>>"Tbl" and
>>>>>>the first field in the table has the name of the table followed by
>>>>>>"ID". The
>>>>>>data type is autonumber. This is the primary key of each record and
>>>>>>identifies the table where the record is stored any time you see the
>>>>>>field
>>>>>>name in the database. In subsequent fields, I use the name of the
>>>>>>first
>>>>>>field in a table when referring to a record in another table. This
>>>>>>(these)
>>>>>>is (are) foreign keys. For example, In TblObservation, ObserverID is a
>>>>>>foreign key and refers to a specific observer in TblObserver. In
>>>>>>TblLocationObservation, ObservationID is a foreign key that relates a
>>>>>>record
>>>>>>to a specific observation in TblObservation. Thus you can have a list
>>>>>>of
>>>>>>safety observations by a specific observer on a specific date.
>>>>>>LocationID In
>>>>>>TblLocationObservation is a foreign key and refers to a specific
>>>>>>location
>>>>>>(maybe Dept X) in Tbllocation. ProcedureID In TblLocationObservation
>>>>>>is a
>>>>>>foreign key and refers to a specific Procedure (maybe Stair/Ladder
>>>>>>Use) in
>>>>>>TblProcedure.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Steve
>>>>>>santus(a)penn.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks Steve,
>>>>>>> I made some progress but I think I've managed to totally confuse
>>>>>>> myself
>>>>>>[quoted text clipped - 38 lines]
>>>>>>>>> my
>>>>>>>>> tables and how they relate. Can you help me?
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Message posted via http://www.accessmonster.com
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>


From: Gina Whipp on 30 Nov 2009 20:31
You OBVIOUSLY did not read my reply... I made reference to the reviewing
the Relationships in the database I recommended for assistance in setting
them up.

This is going no where... You are looking for a reason to argue and I was
simply answering a post.

--
Gina Whipp

"I feel I have been denied critical, need to know, information!" - Tremors
II

http://www.regina-whipp.com/index_files/TipList.htm

"Steve" <notmyemail(a)address.com> wrote in message
news:uYyGcOicKHA.744(a)TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> You missed the OP's question!!! He asked "What should my relationships
> be?"
>
>
> "Gina Whipp" <NotInterested(a)InViruses.com> wrote in message
> news:eTIl2EgcKHA.4708(a)TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>> Steve,
>>
>> I guess you missed this question then...
>>
>> "Should I have an ObserverID fk in tblQuestion since each
>> observer must address all 20 questions with each observation?"
>>
>> ...that question is what I was replying to. I did not mention anything
>> about redesign or wrong tables. I did mention a table to join Observer
>> and AnswersToQuestions because of the question posted but I guess you
>> missed that also.
>>
>> --
>> Gina Whipp
>>
>> "I feel I have been denied critical, need to know, information!" -
>> Tremors II
>>
>> http://www.regina-whipp.com/index_files/TipList.htm
>>
>> "Steve" <notmyemail(a)address.com> wrote in message
>> news:eOESxwfcKHA.800(a)TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>> Firstly, the OP's tables are correctly designed. Why would you recommend
>>> he look at a survey database? Secondly, you said "You will need a
>>> *joiner* table. Again, the OP's tables are correctly designed. He
>>> doesn't need any more tables!!! Your recommendation was completely
>>> erroneous and would only serve to confuse the OP further.
>>>
>>>
>>> "Gina Whipp" <NotInterested(a)InViruses.com> wrote in message
>>> news:ONqe6pdcKHA.4724(a)TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>>> Steve,
>>>>
>>>> Huh? I never said the tables were wrong. DSmith has Questions that
>>>> don't change and therefore adding ObserverID to tblQuestions would be
>>>> an issue and not work properly. Why would that information be wrong?
>>>> I offered a survey database example that gives a wonderful example of
>>>> how a survey would set up AND gave an example of how you deal with
>>>> questions that don't change. And while that database might be
>>>> confusing to you let's give DSmith a change to examine and make that
>>>> determination.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Gina Whipp
>>>>
>>>> "I feel I have been denied critical, need to know, information!" -
>>>> Tremors II
>>>>
>>>> http://www.regina-whipp.com/index_files/TipList.htm
>>>>
>>>> "Steve" <notmyemail(a)address.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:ObK92PdcKHA.744(a)TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>>>> Ignore Ms. Whipp's response; it's wrong and will just confuse you
>>>>> more!
>>>>>
>>>>> Your tables are correct!!!!!
>>>>>
>>>>> Read my previous response and just connect the primary keys and
>>>>> foreign keys for your relationships. In other words, connect each
>>>>> fieldname ending in "ID" in a table with the same field name in the
>>>>> table that defines the details of that fieldname. For example, connect
>>>>> ObserverID in TblObservation to ObserverID in TblObserver.
>>>>>
>>>>> Steve
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "dsmith via AccessMonster.com" <u56186(a)uwe> wrote in message
>>>>> news:9fde7f6b399a5(a)uwe...
>>>>>> Thanks Steve and Gina
>>>>>> my table structure is below:
>>>>>> There are 20 questions that each observer must review each time they
>>>>>> do a
>>>>>> field observation. They must indicate the location of the observation
>>>>>> and the
>>>>>> results of the review, i.e. safe, at risk, or na. What should my
>>>>>> relationships be? I'm having problems getting the tables to relate to
>>>>>> each
>>>>>> other on my form. Should I have an ObserverID fk in tblQuestion since
>>>>>> each
>>>>>> observer must address all 20 questions with each observation?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> TblQuestion
>>>>>> QstnID
>>>>>> QstnText
>>>>>> QstnType
>>>>>>
>>>>>> TblObserver
>>>>>> ObserverID
>>>>>> FirstName
>>>>>> LastName
>>>>>> ObserverDept
>>>>>>
>>>>>> TblLocation
>>>>>> LocationID
>>>>>> Location
>>>>>>
>>>>>> TblObservation
>>>>>> ObservationID
>>>>>> ObservationDate
>>>>>> ObserverID
>>>>>>
>>>>>> TblLocationObservation
>>>>>> LocationObservationID
>>>>>> ObservationID
>>>>>> LocationID
>>>>>> QstnID
>>>>>> LocationObservation
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Steve wrote:
>>>>>>>I follow a standard when setting up tables. All tables begin with
>>>>>>>"Tbl" and
>>>>>>>the first field in the table has the name of the table followed by
>>>>>>>"ID". The
>>>>>>>data type is autonumber. This is the primary key of each record and
>>>>>>>identifies the table where the record is stored any time you see the
>>>>>>>field
>>>>>>>name in the database. In subsequent fields, I use the name of the
>>>>>>>first
>>>>>>>field in a table when referring to a record in another table. This
>>>>>>>(these)
>>>>>>>is (are) foreign keys. For example, In TblObservation, ObserverID is
>>>>>>>a
>>>>>>>foreign key and refers to a specific observer in TblObserver. In
>>>>>>>TblLocationObservation, ObservationID is a foreign key that relates a
>>>>>>>record
>>>>>>>to a specific observation in TblObservation. Thus you can have a list
>>>>>>>of
>>>>>>>safety observations by a specific observer on a specific date.
>>>>>>>LocationID In
>>>>>>>TblLocationObservation is a foreign key and refers to a specific
>>>>>>>location
>>>>>>>(maybe Dept X) in Tbllocation. ProcedureID In TblLocationObservation
>>>>>>>is a
>>>>>>>foreign key and refers to a specific Procedure (maybe Stair/Ladder
>>>>>>>Use) in
>>>>>>>TblProcedure.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Steve
>>>>>>>santus(a)penn.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks Steve,
>>>>>>>> I made some progress but I think I've managed to totally confuse
>>>>>>>> myself
>>>>>>>[quoted text clipped - 38 lines]
>>>>>>>>>> my
>>>>>>>>>> tables and how they relate. Can you help me?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Message posted via http://www.accessmonster.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>


From: Keith Wilby on 1 Dec 2009 03:51
"Gina Whipp" <NotInterested(a)InViruses.com> wrote in message
news:uSEs8XicKHA.4724(a)TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>
> You are looking for a reason to argue and I was simply answering a post.
>
>

Don't try to engage in a battle of wits with an un-armed opponent.

From: Arno R on 1 Dec 2009 04:37

"Steve" <notmyemail(a)address.com> schreef in bericht
news:eOESxwfcKHA.800(a)TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Firstly, the OP's tables are correctly designed. Why would you recommend he look at a
> survey database? Secondly, you said "You will need a *joiner* table. Again, the OP's
> tables are correctly designed. He doesn't need any more tables!!! Your recommendation
> was completely erroneous and would only serve to confuse the OP further.


Hi $teve, why are you constantly making a fool of yourself ??
Simply put: Gina is right and you are not... You are acting very childish *again*
Also: You are simply not understanding the question and/or not reading properly...
(as usual)

OP asked
"Should I have an ObserverID fk in tblQuestion since each observer must address all 20 questions with each observation?"
The answer has been given by Gina..
"no you shouls not have ObserverID in tblQuestion"
This is a correct answer while you state that it is wrong...! (only typo there)

The OP tells us: "Supervisors will observe procedures and mark them as "safe" or "at-risk"
So we need a *joiner* table to collect these observations. Gina is right on this...
This *joiner* is your proposed TblLocationObservation I guess.

BUT:
The OP's tables (you mean yours??) are *not* quite right...
The proposed table TblObservation as such is completely *nonsense*!
You are storing *what* here?? Date and Observer... Related to what ??
You are missing Location??

Maybe the ObservationDate from TblObservation easily be stored in the table TblLocationObservation.
Also things like ObservationTime and such...
Well to be honest... it depends on whether we need the day-time per procedure that we check....
But we definitely don't need the tblObservation as you proposed....
confusing and erroneous indeed....


To the OP:
==> I would consider each and every answer given by $teve as 'At-Risk'
==> I would consider each and every answer given by Gina's as "Safe"

Also I would try to give *meaningful* names to the fields.
That can be very helpful to 'understand' the information we are gathering.

The supposed fieldname 'LocationObservation' does indeed serve to confuse...
Why not use ProcedureObservation instead ?

Regards, Arno R


First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: How big a record size is too big from a performance standpoint
Next: Collecting form data offline