Please start any new threads on our new
site at https://forums.sqlteam.com. We've got lots of great SQL Server
experts to answer whatever question you can come up with.
| Author |
Topic |
|
DarylBlowes
Starting Member
1 Post |
 Posted - 2004-06-23 : 10:04:31
|
| I have several tables representing different transactions (i.e. Resolutions, Communications, Statements, Motions, Hearings)I need to create another table (MinuteItems) that can reference any of these records in any of these tables but only needs to reference one per MinuteItem record.The question is do I build the table like: MinuteItemID ResolutionID CommunicationID StatementID MotionID HearingIDOR, do I do something like this: MinuteItemID ItemType <--- Indicates which table RecordID <--- Indicates which recordThe first one is nice because the referential integrity rules can be used however it wastes space. The second method is nice because it is simple, saves space and can easily be used if more tables need to be referenced in the future. However, the second one will require more coding of triggers for updates, inserts and deletes on all the referenced tables.Decisions, decisions ??????Any input is appreciated.... Daryl. |
|
|
JimL
SQL Slinging Yak Ranger
1537 Posts |
Posted - 2004-06-23 : 10:09:33
|
| Jims Rule:Any method that leaves you opportunity to add to with minimal change is preferable to one that does not. In short a little time now saves a lot of time later.JimUsers <> Logic |
 |
|
|
samtoffa
Yak Posting Veteran
60 Posts |
Posted - 2004-06-23 : 10:13:39
|
| I faced a similar problem some time ago when I had to reference different tables containing data on thousands of vehicles in different countries. I tried both methods and then stuck with the second. Your reasons behind the choice are spot-on. If you don't expect to have many records then go for the first option, but if you are going to have many tables and many rows of data, the second option is worth the extra coding.Sam |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Need Opinions on Design Decision