Tim: ah, come on. :-P
I do have basic knowledge, and beyond. I am mostly a MySQL dev (dont flame
yet), but have a good grasp on bds in general.
I usually solve the BD problems/situations in a way i can easily code around
it, since i am normally the dev on the programming front also. This time i
a
Miguel Vaz wrote:
> Thank you for the opinion, Alban. The names are the least of my worries, i
> typed them without thinking. And its portuguese. :-)
> If, using that design, i had a different table with something like arq_types
> { id_arq_type, descr } that i could somehow connect to the generi
On 9 Jul 2010, at 17:08, Miguel Vaz wrote:
>
> Thank you for the opinion, Alban. The names are the least of my worries, i
> typed them without thinking. And its portuguese. :-)
>
> If, using that design, i had a different table with something like arq_types
> { id_arq_type, descr } that i coul
Thank you for the opinion, Alban. The names are the least of my worries, i
typed them without thinking. And its portuguese. :-)
If, using that design, i had a different table with something like arq_types
{ id_arq_type, descr } that i could somehow connect to the generic table
(the one with the co
Miguel Vaz wrote:
> I was looking for an opinion on the actual table structure. :-) How should i
> build the data set? Is my second example ok? The first is the long version
> but i wanted to put together all the common fields to both types of "sites"
> and then (maybe) build tables to accomodate
On 9 Jul 2010, at 3:41, Miguel Vaz wrote:
> and i would like to put these two "sites" in the same data set and maybe add
> a new table called "site types" to categorize each record (maybe a relation
> table to allow many to many): how can i go about doing it? is this solution
> decent enough:
>
Hi, Tim,
I was looking for an opinion on the actual table structure. :-) How should i
build the data set? Is my second example ok? The first is the long version
but i wanted to put together all the common fields to both types of "sites"
and then (maybe) build tables to accomodate the specific field
Miguel Vaz wrote:
> [...]
> * sites (generic):
> id_site
> name
> description
> x
> y
> * site_natural
> id
> id_site
> altitude
> * site_arqueology
> id
> id_site
> id_category
> id_period
> But i seem to be missing something. How can i have this in a way that its
> easy to list only "arqueo
Hi,
I am having some uncertainty while designing the following structure:
I have two sets of data:
* arqueology sites (can be natural):
id
name
description
id_category
id_period
x
y
* natural sites (can be arqueological also - bear with me -, so there will
be duplicate records in the above t
