Re: standard and easy way to do schema design

From: <Doug_McMahon_at_yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 10:53:27 -0700
Message-ID: <1187200407.724958.280830_at_g12g2000prg.googlegroups.com>

BTW my earlier mistake shows the danger of making assumptions. For example the users of the system may have had in mind a relationship where a theater is listed by all zip codes for which it's considered "close enough", implying a many-to-many. Or, it could be that a zip code is assigned a lat/long coordinate or bounding-box lat/long coordinates, as are all theaters, and the query is supposed to do some sort of spatial operation, implying no direct relationship at all between theaters and zip codes. Received on Wed Aug 15 2007 - 19:53:27 CEST

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: JOG: "Re: A pk is *both* a physical and a logical object."
Previous message: Brian Selzer: "Re: A pk is *both* a physical and a logical object."
In reply to: Doug_McMahon_at_yahoo.com: "Re: standard and easy way to do schema design"
Next in thread: -CELKO-: "Re: standard and easy way to do schema design"
Reply: Roy Harvey: "Re: standard and easy way to do schema design"

Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]

Original text of this message