If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Organizing Table
First of all...Thank you for all of your help.
Now more questions: I am using the database to maintain the budget and forecast processes, each of which has many versions. I created 3 tables, tblYear (2010, 2009, 2008...), tblCycle(Budget, 1qForecast, 2qForecast, Final...) and tblVersion (10/1/2009 12:00 PM, 10/15/2009 12:30 PM). If I understand you correctly I should have this as one table? -- Thank You, Steve "Jeff Boyce" wrote: Steve I'm with John on this... Adding another field to handle another month means you'll always be maintaining the application, updating the table structure, the queries, the forms, the reports, etc. Moreover, since Access is optimized for well-normalized data, if you try to feed it 'sheet data, both you and Access will have to work overtime to come up with (unnecessary) work-arounds. I suspect that folks with experience using Excel before considering Access have a BIGGER task coming up to speed, as they have to unlearn some of what they've been doing if they want to make good/efficient/effective use of the tool. Best of luck! Regards Jeff Boyce Microsoft Access MVP -- Disclaimer: This author may have received products and services mentioned in this post. Mention and/or description of a product or service herein does not constitute endorsement thereof. Any code or psuedocode included in this post is offered "as is", with no guarantee as to suitability. You can thank the FTC of the USA for making this disclaimer possible/necessary. "Steve D" wrote in message ... I get what you are saying but I would like to understand better how the database works. Why is it better to use the full date and have many records than to use one table with 12 months and one table with the years? I felt like I needed the Year table. I am using the database to manage the budget and forecast cycles, so I have a table called tblCycle and I wanted to be able to relate that with a year so I would be able to pull the 2007 budget, etc.., but now I think I could just query using the month field or Year([dtmMonth)]. Am I on the right path? -- Thank You, Steve "John W. Vinson" wrote: On Wed, 28 Oct 2009 11:07:01 -0700, Steve D wrote: I am ultimately going to want to use a crosstab query that will show multiple years in the rows. Do you still suggest using date/time? Even more strongly, yes. You can crosstab by year using Year([datefield]) as the Column Head - or by year and month using Format([datefield], "yyyy-mm"), or by week using DatePart([datefield], "ww"). Like I said, great flexibility! -- John W. Vinson [MVP] . . |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Organizing Table
Steve
I'm having trouble envisioning how 2010, 2009 and 2008 is a table? Can you provide an example of what data you are storing in that table? Regards Jeff Boyce Microsoft Access MVP -- Disclaimer: This author may have received products and services mentioned in this post. Mention and/or description of a product or service herein does not constitute endorsement thereof. Any code or psuedocode included in this post is offered "as is", with no guarantee as to suitability. You can thank the FTC of the USA for making this disclaimer possible/necessary. "Steve D" wrote in message ... First of all...Thank you for all of your help. Now more questions: I am using the database to maintain the budget and forecast processes, each of which has many versions. I created 3 tables, tblYear (2010, 2009, 2008...), tblCycle(Budget, 1qForecast, 2qForecast, Final...) and tblVersion (10/1/2009 12:00 PM, 10/15/2009 12:30 PM). If I understand you correctly I should have this as one table? -- Thank You, Steve "Jeff Boyce" wrote: Steve I'm with John on this... Adding another field to handle another month means you'll always be maintaining the application, updating the table structure, the queries, the forms, the reports, etc. Moreover, since Access is optimized for well-normalized data, if you try to feed it 'sheet data, both you and Access will have to work overtime to come up with (unnecessary) work-arounds. I suspect that folks with experience using Excel before considering Access have a BIGGER task coming up to speed, as they have to unlearn some of what they've been doing if they want to make good/efficient/effective use of the tool. Best of luck! Regards Jeff Boyce Microsoft Access MVP -- Disclaimer: This author may have received products and services mentioned in this post. Mention and/or description of a product or service herein does not constitute endorsement thereof. Any code or psuedocode included in this post is offered "as is", with no guarantee as to suitability. You can thank the FTC of the USA for making this disclaimer possible/necessary. "Steve D" wrote in message ... I get what you are saying but I would like to understand better how the database works. Why is it better to use the full date and have many records than to use one table with 12 months and one table with the years? I felt like I needed the Year table. I am using the database to manage the budget and forecast cycles, so I have a table called tblCycle and I wanted to be able to relate that with a year so I would be able to pull the 2007 budget, etc.., but now I think I could just query using the month field or Year([dtmMonth)]. Am I on the right path? -- Thank You, Steve "John W. Vinson" wrote: On Wed, 28 Oct 2009 11:07:01 -0700, Steve D wrote: I am ultimately going to want to use a crosstab query that will show multiple years in the rows. Do you still suggest using date/time? Even more strongly, yes. You can crosstab by year using Year([datefield]) as the Column Head - or by year and month using Format([datefield], "yyyy-mm"), or by week using DatePart([datefield], "ww"). Like I said, great flexibility! -- John W. Vinson [MVP] . . |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Organizing Table
Jeff,
I have been using Hyperion Enterprise at work and from a user perspective it looks to me that it has several individual tables that you choose from to retrieve data (I'm sure the programming is much more sophisticated but I am going with what I see) So each data value has a corresponding Period, Entity, Frequency, Category, etc... So I am trying to re-create something that works the same way for my call center volume planning model. Each of my values will have a Year (2008, 2009...), Month (Jan, Feb, Mar...), Cycle (Budget, Q1 Fcst, Q2 Fcst...), Version (10/1/09, 10/15/09...) and Call Type (Billing, General Info, Quality of Service...) at the end of the day I have one table with multiple lookups that looks like: Year, Month, Cycle, Version, Call Type, # of Calls 2009, Jan, Q3 Fcst, 10/1/09, Billing, 25000 2009, Feb, Q3 Fcst, 10/1/09, Billing, 24000 2009, Mar, Q3 Fcst, 10/1/09, Billing, 23000 2009, Jan, Q3 Fcst, 10/15/09, Billing, 26000 2009, Feb, Q3 Fcst, 10/15/09, Billing, 25000 2009, Mar, Q3 Fcst, 10/15/09, Billing, 24000 2009, Jan, Budget, 10/15/09, Billing, 26500 2009, Feb, Budget, 10/15/09, Billing, 25500 2009, Mar, Budget, 10/15/09, Billing, 24500 -- Thank You, Steve "Jeff Boyce" wrote: Steve I'm having trouble envisioning how 2010, 2009 and 2008 is a table? Can you provide an example of what data you are storing in that table? Regards Jeff Boyce Microsoft Access MVP -- Disclaimer: This author may have received products and services mentioned in this post. Mention and/or description of a product or service herein does not constitute endorsement thereof. Any code or psuedocode included in this post is offered "as is", with no guarantee as to suitability. You can thank the FTC of the USA for making this disclaimer possible/necessary. "Steve D" wrote in message ... First of all...Thank you for all of your help. Now more questions: I am using the database to maintain the budget and forecast processes, each of which has many versions. I created 3 tables, tblYear (2010, 2009, 2008...), tblCycle(Budget, 1qForecast, 2qForecast, Final...) and tblVersion (10/1/2009 12:00 PM, 10/15/2009 12:30 PM). If I understand you correctly I should have this as one table? -- Thank You, Steve "Jeff Boyce" wrote: Steve I'm with John on this... Adding another field to handle another month means you'll always be maintaining the application, updating the table structure, the queries, the forms, the reports, etc. Moreover, since Access is optimized for well-normalized data, if you try to feed it 'sheet data, both you and Access will have to work overtime to come up with (unnecessary) work-arounds. I suspect that folks with experience using Excel before considering Access have a BIGGER task coming up to speed, as they have to unlearn some of what they've been doing if they want to make good/efficient/effective use of the tool. Best of luck! Regards Jeff Boyce Microsoft Access MVP -- Disclaimer: This author may have received products and services mentioned in this post. Mention and/or description of a product or service herein does not constitute endorsement thereof. Any code or psuedocode included in this post is offered "as is", with no guarantee as to suitability. You can thank the FTC of the USA for making this disclaimer possible/necessary. "Steve D" wrote in message ... I get what you are saying but I would like to understand better how the database works. Why is it better to use the full date and have many records than to use one table with 12 months and one table with the years? I felt like I needed the Year table. I am using the database to manage the budget and forecast cycles, so I have a table called tblCycle and I wanted to be able to relate that with a year so I would be able to pull the 2007 budget, etc.., but now I think I could just query using the month field or Year([dtmMonth)]. Am I on the right path? -- Thank You, Steve "John W. Vinson" wrote: On Wed, 28 Oct 2009 11:07:01 -0700, Steve D wrote: I am ultimately going to want to use a crosstab query that will show multiple years in the rows. Do you still suggest using date/time? Even more strongly, yes. You can crosstab by year using Year([datefield]) as the Column Head - or by year and month using Format([datefield], "yyyy-mm"), or by week using DatePart([datefield], "ww"). Like I said, great flexibility! -- John W. Vinson [MVP] . . . |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Organizing Table
On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 08:51:01 -0700, Steve D
wrote: I have been using Hyperion Enterprise at work and from a user perspective it looks to me that it has several individual tables that you choose from to retrieve data Access is NOT a flawed implementation of Hyperion Enterprise. Hyperion Enterprise is likewise NOT a flawed implementation of Access. Trying to apply the logic and design conventions of one software package to another will be an exercise in frustration! If you're going to use Access, I'd really recommend that you use it on its own terms, as it's designed to be used. This would NOT include creating a new table every year, or every quarter. The table you post looks like one piece of a reasonable structure, but if you're still thinking of "a 2008 table" or a "February table" you're on the wrong track. -- John W. Vinson [MVP] |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Organizing Table
My intention was never to build a seperate table for each year, just a table
that contained all of the years (tblYear), and one that contained all of the months (tblMonth - 12 records - no more, no less). The table I showed as an example would reference all of those individual tables so if I needed to change a version name or add a year I would do it in the respective tables, tblVersion or tblYear, and the changes would be made globally. Sorry if that wasn't clear. -- Thank You, Steve "John W. Vinson" wrote: On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 08:51:01 -0700, Steve D wrote: I have been using Hyperion Enterprise at work and from a user perspective it looks to me that it has several individual tables that you choose from to retrieve data Access is NOT a flawed implementation of Hyperion Enterprise. Hyperion Enterprise is likewise NOT a flawed implementation of Access. Trying to apply the logic and design conventions of one software package to another will be an exercise in frustration! If you're going to use Access, I'd really recommend that you use it on its own terms, as it's designed to be used. This would NOT include creating a new table every year, or every quarter. The table you post looks like one piece of a reasonable structure, but if you're still thinking of "a 2008 table" or a "February table" you're on the wrong track. -- John W. Vinson [MVP] . |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|