Subject:
|
Re: A database question
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.database
|
Date:
|
Wed, 25 Nov 1998 11:23:43 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
409 times
|
| |
|
|
"Jim Hughes" <hughesj@one.net> writes:
> [...] What is the best way to handle the fact that a given set number
> can refer to different sets and a given set can have multiple
> set numbers? [...]
Since set numbers are not unique, they shouldn't be used as primary keys.
So the best solution is to move the set number into a secondary key and
introduce a new primary key which is either a function of the set number by
tacking on "-1", "-2", or somesuch (like the FLG and the Lugnet/Pause DB's
currently do) or give each object a random OID (Object-ID). You could also
catenate the set number with the year, e.g. "8480-1996" but that's not truly
unique either; LEGO has in the past released the same set number multiple
times in a single year. You could also use letters in your set numbers,
e.g. "1974a", "1974b", etc.
--Todd
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | A database question
|
| Hi: I am currently in the early stages of completely redoing my Lego Technics site and decided it would be cool to put all of my information about technic sets and elements into an Access database (this may not be the best choice but is was free!). (...) (26 years ago, 25-Nov-98, to lugnet.admin.database)
|
8 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
Active threads in Database
|
|
|
|
|
|
