To Split, or not to split (a table)! That is the question...
"1" 1@1 wrote in :
a) Keep the table schema as is and let the relationships split the
equipment to be serviced from that is to be standardized or,
In priniciple, I cannot see any problem with your design as it is. I am
assuming there are other differences between Services and
Standardisations that you have not mentioned he NewPartsFitted,
DeviationFromZero and so on. If not, you might well be better off with a
single Interventions table but that is probably up to you.
If 99% of the equipment needs only Service _or_ Standardisation, then you
have to be able to cope with the other 1%. Do they get two records for
two interventions, or do you need a new DualInspection type or what?
It's easy to find out what has never been inspected:
select equipid from equipment
where equipid not in
( select distinct equipid from services
union
select distinct equipid from standardisations
)
and what is due for new servicing (more than six months ago, etc):
select equipid from services
where completeddate dateadd("m", Date(), -6)
union
select equipid from qryNeverBeenSeen // see above!
and so on.
b) Split the equipment table into two tables (ServEquip, StandEquip)
so that every record of each table relates to every record one the
other??
Yuk: this sounds like a major maintenance nightmare. Keep one Type Of
Thing in one Table!
Hope that helps
Tim F
|