2 added 31 characters in body
source | link

I am struggling with the concept of 2NF form. Lets say I have a set of functional dependencies for R1(A,B,C,D,E, H,M,K)R1(A,B,C,D,E,H,M,K) Where :

B->M,C AB->D DH ->E H->K A->H

B  -> M,C
AB -> D
DH -> E
H  -> K
A  -> H

Whenever I try to decompose it, I directly get 3 NF3NF tables. What are the rules to get something in 2 NF2NF, with minimal set of tables ?

Now how do I take this further to 3 NF3NF or BCNF?

I am struggling with the concept of 2NF form. Lets say I have a set of functional dependencies for R1(A,B,C,D,E, H,M,K) Where :

B->M,C AB->D DH ->E H->K A->H

Whenever I try to decompose it, I directly get 3 NF tables. What are the rules to get something in 2 NF, with minimal set of tables ?

Now how do I take this further to 3 NF or BCNF?

I am struggling with the concept of 2NF form. Lets say I have a set of functional dependencies for R1(A,B,C,D,E,H,M,K) Where :

B  -> M,C
AB -> D
DH -> E
H  -> K
A  -> H

Whenever I try to decompose it, I directly get 3NF tables. What are the rules to get something in 2NF, with minimal set of tables ?

Now how do I take this further to 3NF or BCNF?

1
source | link

Rules for Decomposition to 2 NF

I am struggling with the concept of 2NF form. Lets say I have a set of functional dependencies for R1(A,B,C,D,E, H,M,K) Where :

B->M,C AB->D DH ->E H->K A->H

Whenever I try to decompose it, I directly get 3 NF tables. What are the rules to get something in 2 NF, with minimal set of tables ?

Now how do I take this further to 3 NF or BCNF?