Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
This question is based on my plan at the thread.
My entity-relationship diagram is
alt text http://files.getdropbox.com/u/175564/sequence-diagram.png
I would like to know the following.
Does my sequence diagram match the following relation diagram?
alt text http://files.getdropbox.com/u/175564/table-problem-3.png
Reviewing the first diagram as the Logical model, typically the tables defined in the Logical also exist in the physical – you’re missing the QUESTION-TAGS (nee QUESTION-SUBJECTS) table. You have a one-to-one relationship between QUESTION and MONITOR-CHECK, which means there’s no value to having MONITOR-CHECK – move the attributes into the QUESTION
table.
Viewing the second diagram as the Physical ERD model – there’s no benefit to having two tables with a one-to-one relationship. I’m speaking about the QUESTION / QUESTION-BODY, and QUESTION / MODERATOR-CHECK tables.
QUESTION-SUBJECTS is poorly named – if by your note the record represents a “tag”, then name the table accordingly. This table would be a code table (having CODE, DESCRIPTION columns) because you want to keep the values consistent for queries to perform well. That said, you need an xref/lookup/corollary table between the QUESTION and QUESTION-TAGS table in order to have a one [question related] to many [question tags].
QUESTION-TAG-XREF