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 Rhinorhino 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
Joined
Apr 19, 2002
Messages
19
Location
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