Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!

Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!

  • Congratulations SkipVought on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

a relationship which is obligatory on the 'many' side

Status
Not open for further replies.

ngoz1

Programmer
Apr 19, 2002
19
0
0
GB
hi everyone,
im new to this group :)

My question is -"If i want to create a one to many relationship between two tables. and i find that the many side is non obligatory
( i.e optional), do i need to create a join table between them? or is that just for many to many relationships"
 
A one to many relationship join is not necessary unless you want the following:

- You want to maintain a tight relationship between the one record and the many. By adding cascade delete / update options, you can ensure that if records are changed or deleted on the one side, the changes and/or deletions are reflected on the many side.

- Relational joins aid in the quick development of query objects, ensuring that keys are appropriately linked petersdaniel@hotmail.com
"If A equals success, then the formula is: A=X+Y+Z. X is work. Y is play. Z is keep your mouth shut." --Albert Einstein

 
i think you may have misunderstood my question( though you also cleared some confusions i had about cascade joins)
let me rephrase my question:
i read some where that :

a sperate relationship table is required for any many to many relationship(which i agree with)
i also read that for a 1:m relationship - if the many entity type is non obligatory you must also define three tables(ie one table for each of the entities and one for the the relationship- this is the table i was referring to, as the join table) -is this true or rather necessary!!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor

Back
Top