Re: Enforcing one-to-many relationships

From: DA Morgan <damorgan_at_psoug.org>
Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 06:23:52 -0700
Message-ID: <1183987428.800633@bubbleator.drizzle.com>

Frank van Bortel wrote:

> On 8 jul, 18:48, DA Morgan <damor..._at_psoug.org> wrote:
> 

>> Perhaps from a more realistic standpoint the relationship must be M:M
>> as one manufacturer may have more than one item and an item may have
>> more than one manufacturer.
>>
>> The solution is use deferrable constraints, an intersecting entity, and
>> perform the enforcement of the business rule with the primary key of the
>> intersection.
>> --
>> Daniel A. Morgan
>> University of Washington
>> damor..._at_x.washington.edu (replace x with u to respond)
>> Puget Sound Oracle Users Groupwww.psoug.org
> True, but not what the OP stated.
> What you describe is the, let's say, natural way things are?

And you believe the OP? <g>

I understand what the OP said ... I am just respectfully disagreeing. Perhaps he or she will enlighten us further.

-- 
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu (replace x with u to respond)
Puget Sound Oracle Users Group
www.psoug.org

Received on Mon Jul 09 2007 - 08:23:52 CDT