A Microsoft Office (Excel, Word) forum. OfficeFrustration

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.

Go Back   Home » OfficeFrustration forum » Microsoft Access » Database Design
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read  

Table Design



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 9th, 2005, 08:17 AM
Paul Cooper via AccessMonster.com
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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
Ads
  #2  
Old February 9th, 2005, 01:38 PM
Jeff Boyce
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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:[email protected] 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  
Old February 10th, 2005, 07:50 AM
Paul Cooper via AccessMonster.com
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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  
Old February 10th, 2005, 02:52 PM
Jeff Boyce
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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:[email protected] 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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

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


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:49 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2019 OfficeFrustration.
The comments are property of their posters.