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 |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Table Design
I'm designing an access 2003 DB for a small Newspaper. It will monitor the
deadlines of the newspaper. Each record is a day. There are 5 people that could access the record at the same time. Each person editing a different field. Each user is forced to only edit their fields. Is it better to have 1 table, or 1 for each user, and then use a relationship to connect them together. I would prefer 1 table for simplicity, but that might not be the best design. Thanks, Paul -- Message posted via http://www.accessmonster.com |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Paul
You've not really given us much to go on. "Each record is a day". What facts are you recording about "a day"? "5 people that could access the record... editing a different field". That may be, given your current data design. But without some idea of what you are recording... I'd offer a blanket suggestion against using one table per person -- as soon as you start embedding data (i.e., which person) in your table names, you are in trouble as far as making efficient use of Access goes. For example, what would you do if someone new was hired? Someone was fired? -- More info, please ... Jeff Boyce Access MVP "Paul Cooper via AccessMonster.com" wrote in message news:bcd6ef8fe6d84d4d9f568a3c6d5c97c7@AccessMonste r.com... I'm designing an access 2003 DB for a small Newspaper. It will monitor the deadlines of the newspaper. Each record is a day. There are 5 people that could access the record at the same time. Each person editing a different field. Each user is forced to only edit their fields. Is it better to have 1 table, or 1 for each user, and then use a relationship to connect them together. I would prefer 1 table for simplicity, but that might not be the best design. Thanks, Paul -- Message posted via http://www.accessmonster.com |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Records = Days, Table1=Actual Times, Table2= Deadline Times. There are
about 25 times. I compare the actual times against the deadline times. To show if we made our deadlines. I have 5 users with different times to input. (They are in different departments.) So, Each user is editing a different field on the same record. Sometimes at the same time. I am going to split the database when everything is done, but I need to know whether it would be better to break the Actual Table times into 5 separate tables, one for each department (or user). The data is based upon the department and not the individual. The amount of tables would never need to change. It is easier to analyze 1 table then 5. That is why I would like to stick to one table. I just think it may not be feasible. Thanks, Paul -- Message posted via http://www.accessmonster.com |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Paul
I read and re-read your description but I'm still having trouble visualizing your data. Are you saying that your table(s) have "repeating fields" ('... about 25 times')? If so, you have a spreadsheet, not a relational database. I'd suggest posting some actual data, in the structure you have/are proposing, to help folks (or maybe just me!) get our heads around what data you are working with. I'd also suggest that you step back from what you have and consider normalization rules -- your data structure may be causing you to find work-arounds in Access. If you have a well-normalized table structure, Access has strong tools. Otherwise, ... workarounds! -- Good luck Jeff Boyce Access MVP "Paul Cooper via AccessMonster.com" wrote in message news:bba8db6eb5db41c0ad21db31763966a5@AccessMonste r.com... Records = Days, Table1=Actual Times, Table2= Deadline Times. There are about 25 times. I compare the actual times against the deadline times. To show if we made our deadlines. I have 5 users with different times to input. (They are in different departments.) So, Each user is editing a different field on the same record. Sometimes at the same time. I am going to split the database when everything is done, but I need to know whether it would be better to break the Actual Table times into 5 separate tables, one for each department (or user). The data is based upon the department and not the individual. The amount of tables would never need to change. It is easier to analyze 1 table then 5. That is why I would like to stick to one table. I just think it may not be feasible. Thanks, Paul -- Message posted via http://www.accessmonster.com |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Manual line break spaces on TOC or Table of tables | Eric | Page Layout | 9 | October 29th, 2004 04:42 PM |
Need help w/ table design | Tom | Database Design | 0 | August 12th, 2004 02:34 PM |
Complicated Databse w/many relationships | Søren | Database Design | 7 | July 13th, 2004 05:41 AM |
Table design question - advice needed | David | Database Design | 3 | June 8th, 2004 02:21 AM |
COMPARE THE TWO TABLES | Stefanie | General Discussion | 0 | June 4th, 2004 04:36 PM |