Tag Info

New answers tagged

4

Other than the minor things you've already picked up on (additional storage requirements, and potential performance differences as a result of requiring more I/O for the same number of rows), no, I can't think of any real gotchas with adding a ROWVERSION column to these tables. One potential issue, though, with merge replication specifically, is if Access ...


0

I don't have Microsoft Access, but I created a test in MySQL. My table (freddy) - don't pay attention to the name: mysql> select * from freddy; +-------+----------------+ | regno | email | +-------+----------------+ | 2 | blah@blah1.com | | 2 | blah@ah1.com | | 2 | blah@ah1.com | | 4 | blah@ah1.com | ...


2

Bill Karwin covers the alternatives well in his presentation. I have a few notes on a similar but slightly different closure table in: http://dustbite.se/tree/ The idea is to have one table that represents the parent relation, and another that represents the ancestor relation. All changes to the ancestor relation is a consequence of a change in the ...


2

I would create a separate table for history. If it was me, I would use an auto-increment column for the primary key (historyID) , a column for the vial ID, and a column for a location ID. I would think the vial ID would be foreign key to the nodes table. You could then query against a vial to see it's full history. Since you don't list what your lookup ...


1

Well the database design is ok. But I would suggest one change. Instead of making a direct join between Teamroster and Player, I would suggest this design: Table Player: id (PK) PlayerName ... Table Teams: id (PK) TeamName ... Table: PlayerTeamPositions team_id (PK) (FK references table teams) player_id (PK) (FK references table players) position_id ...


2

IMHO This is not good design. You have teamname in league table and teams table. What also is not good to have mixed conventions (plural and singular for table names) I would note that you should also put unique index on this fields: toplane, jungler, midlane, adc, support. create unique index teamroster_unique_idx on (toplane, jungler, midlane, adc, ...


3

Maybe you should use the type conversion function CInt()? As in, CInt(expr1) + CInt(expr2). Does this fix your problem? This is necessary if you haven't defined the column data type as a numeric type.


0

The INSERT command comes in two flavors (this is for SQL Server but there's a good chance it'll be the same for Access, too): (1) either you have all your values available, as literals or SQL Server variables - in that case, you can use the INSERT .. VALUES() approach: INSERT INTO dbo.YourTable(Col1, Col2, ...., ColN) VALUES(Value1, Value2, @Variable3, ...


0

I finally determined the lookups have the be setup in Access, they won't automatically be created when attaching a sql server table as a link.


1

You need to apply the function (Nz) that replaces the null with another value before the week function call. Use: week( Nz(Tab2.y, Value_for_y) , Nz(Tab2.w, Value_for_w) ) You probably also need tests against the special Value_for_y or Value_for_w inside week().


4

I would use a view. Just prepare a select in the form of: SELECT Field1, Field2, Field3, Field4, null as Field5, null as Field6 FROM Table1 UNION SELECT Field1, null, Field3, Field4, Field5, Field6 FROM Table2; You can refine the select to filter or extend, as you like. When you're satisfied, just define a view as: CREATE VIEW MergedTable AS ...



Top 50 recent answers are included