More than one path between M-M tables
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}
I'm trying to figure out if it is bad practice to have more than one path between tables that are related via many-to-many relationships.
I have 3 user-facing tables: Dupe, Cue, and Take. There is a many-to-many relationship between Dupes and Cues, and there is a many-to-many relationship between Takes and the join table Dupe_Cues.
The user can add, delete, and modify Cues, Dupes and Takes, and she can make links between Cues/Dupes and Cues/Takes, but there are also certain situations when the user will want to directly add a Take to a Dupe, without creating a cue. So I figure the simplest thing to do is create a Dupe_Take table. The problem is, I'm worried it will cause referential issues and isn't good database design.
If I don't create a Dupe_Take table, I suppose I could add a field to the Cue table, like "b_CreatedByUser". Then, whenever the user does a query, I filter out Cues where b_CreatedByUser=FALSE so that Cues that are only used to link Takes to Dupes are never shown to the user, but that sounds sloppy and difficult to maintain.
What is the best practice? What factors should I be considering?
Thanks for any advice.
referential-integrity many-to-many
asked 16 mins ago
slondikeslondike
1
New contributor
slondike is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
I'm trying to figure out if it is bad practice to have more than one path between tables that are related via many-to-many relationships.
I have 3 user-facing tables: Dupe, Cue, and Take. There is a many-to-many relationship between Dupes and Cues, and there is a many-to-many relationship between Takes and the join table Dupe_Cues.
The user can add, delete, and modify Cues, Dupes and Takes, and she can make links between Cues/Dupes and Cues/Takes, but there are also certain situations when the user will want to directly add a Take to a Dupe, without creating a cue. So I figure the simplest thing to do is create a Dupe_Take table. The problem is, I'm worried it will cause referential issues and isn't good database design.
If I don't create a Dupe_Take table, I suppose I could add a field to the Cue table, like "b_CreatedByUser". Then, whenever the user does a query, I filter out Cues where b_CreatedByUser=FALSE so that Cues that are only used to link Takes to Dupes are never shown to the user, but that sounds sloppy and difficult to maintain.
What is the best practice? What factors should I be considering?
Thanks for any advice.
referential-integrity many-to-many
asked 16 mins ago
slondikeslondike
1
New contributor
slondike is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
there are also certain situations when the user will want to directly add a Take to a Dupe, without creating a cue. If so your referential scheme is wrong. There is no "major" and "minor" references.
– Akina
11 mins ago
add a comment |
I'm trying to figure out if it is bad practice to have more than one path between tables that are related via many-to-many relationships.
I have 3 user-facing tables: Dupe, Cue, and Take. There is a many-to-many relationship between Dupes and Cues, and there is a many-to-many relationship between Takes and the join table Dupe_Cues.
The user can add, delete, and modify Cues, Dupes and Takes, and she can make links between Cues/Dupes and Cues/Takes, but there are also certain situations when the user will want to directly add a Take to a Dupe, without creating a cue. So I figure the simplest thing to do is create a Dupe_Take table. The problem is, I'm worried it will cause referential issues and isn't good database design.
If I don't create a Dupe_Take table, I suppose I could add a field to the Cue table, like "b_CreatedByUser". Then, whenever the user does a query, I filter out Cues where b_CreatedByUser=FALSE so that Cues that are only used to link Takes to Dupes are never shown to the user, but that sounds sloppy and difficult to maintain.
What is the best practice? What factors should I be considering?
Thanks for any advice.
referential-integrity many-to-many
asked 16 mins ago
slondikeslondike
1
New contributor
slondike is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
I'm trying to figure out if it is bad practice to have more than one path between tables that are related via many-to-many relationships.
I have 3 user-facing tables: Dupe, Cue, and Take. There is a many-to-many relationship between Dupes and Cues, and there is a many-to-many relationship between Takes and the join table Dupe_Cues.
The user can add, delete, and modify Cues, Dupes and Takes, and she can make links between Cues/Dupes and Cues/Takes, but there are also certain situations when the user will want to directly add a Take to a Dupe, without creating a cue. So I figure the simplest thing to do is create a Dupe_Take table. The problem is, I'm worried it will cause referential issues and isn't good database design.
If I don't create a Dupe_Take table, I suppose I could add a field to the Cue table, like "b_CreatedByUser". Then, whenever the user does a query, I filter out Cues where b_CreatedByUser=FALSE so that Cues that are only used to link Takes to Dupes are never shown to the user, but that sounds sloppy and difficult to maintain.
What is the best practice? What factors should I be considering?
Thanks for any advice.
referential-integrity many-to-many
referential-integrity many-to-many
asked 16 mins ago
slondikeslondike
1
New contributor
slondike is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 16 mins ago
slondikeslondike
1
New contributor
slondike is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 16 mins ago
slondikeslondike
1
New contributor
slondike is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 16 mins ago
slondikeslondike
1
asked 16 mins ago
slondikeslondike
1
1
New contributor
slondike is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
slondike is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
slondike is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
there are also certain situations when the user will want to directly add a Take to a Dupe, without creating a cue. If so your referential scheme is wrong. There is no "major" and "minor" references.
– Akina
11 mins ago
add a comment |
there are also certain situations when the user will want to directly add a Take to a Dupe, without creating a cue. If so your referential scheme is wrong. There is no "major" and "minor" references.
– Akina
11 mins ago
there are also certain situations when the user will want to directly add a Take to a Dupe, without creating a cue. If so your referential scheme is wrong. There is no "major" and "minor" references.
– Akina
11 mins ago
there are also certain situations when the user will want to directly add a Take to a Dupe, without creating a cue. If so your referential scheme is wrong. There is no "major" and "minor" references.
– Akina
11 mins ago
add a comment |
0
active
oldest
votes
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "182"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
slondike is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fdba.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f234517%2fmore-than-one-path-between-m-m-tables%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
0
active
oldest
votes
0
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
slondike is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
slondike is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
slondike is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
slondike is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Database Administrators Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fdba.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f234517%2fmore-than-one-path-between-m-m-tables%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
there are also certain situations when the user will want to directly add a Take to a Dupe, without creating a cue. If so your referential scheme is wrong. There is no "major" and "minor" references.
– Akina
11 mins ago