Off Topic
Are you a QOTWer? Do you want to start a thread that isn't a direct answer to the current QOTW? Then this place, gentle poster, is your friend.
( , Sun 1 Apr 2001, 1:00)
Are you a QOTWer? Do you want to start a thread that isn't a direct answer to the current QOTW? Then this place, gentle poster, is your friend.
( , Sun 1 Apr 2001, 1:00)
« Go Back | See The Full Thread
hmm
OK I would use a sheep ID as the primary key.
[sheepID],[name],[gender],[colour],[Generation],[kids]
using generation as the secondary key
as in
[generation],[sheepID],[name],[kids],{sheepID]*
*lists sheepID of ofspring
( , Fri 4 May 2012, 22:05, 2 replies, latest was 12 years ago)
OK I would use a sheep ID as the primary key.
[sheepID],[name],[gender],[colour],[Generation],[kids]
using generation as the secondary key
as in
[generation],[sheepID],[name],[kids],{sheepID]*
*lists sheepID of ofspring
( , Fri 4 May 2012, 22:05, 2 replies, latest was 12 years ago)
Dunno
I'm not trying to work it out.
I'm drinking and listening to music.
( , Fri 4 May 2012, 22:11, Reply)
I'm not trying to work it out.
I'm drinking and listening to music.
( , Fri 4 May 2012, 22:11, Reply)
Almost, really close. You got the trick question in there... doing it all in one table.
But the one you would use
SheepID| Name* | *Colour | MotherID | FatherID |
Every sheep has a mother and father, but not all have children. You wouldn't use the offspring one because although you can have blank, not all of them would have kids. The FatherID and MotherID are the Secondary Keys and SheepID is the pimary key.
* not really relivent for this example, but its just to show that there are tables that _aren't_ keys.
( , Fri 4 May 2012, 22:12, Reply)
But the one you would use
SheepID| Name* | *Colour | MotherID | FatherID |
Every sheep has a mother and father, but not all have children. You wouldn't use the offspring one because although you can have blank, not all of them would have kids. The FatherID and MotherID are the Secondary Keys and SheepID is the pimary key.
* not really relivent for this example, but its just to show that there are tables that _aren't_ keys.
( , Fri 4 May 2012, 22:12, Reply)
Haha, right click on most web pages and go 'view source'.
I can read all that like english, and pretty much like 99% of the stuff that its linked too.... and pretty much the level behind that which generates what you see. And the level behind that which is the database itself. That's where I'm fluent. The level behind that, which is the server stuff, I can semi-read (for lack of a better expression) but not enough to say its part of my job. The next layer behind that, the operating system, I can read, and the final layer which is the hardware, I don't have a clue.
It's more Inception than Matrix =)
( , Fri 4 May 2012, 22:35, Reply)
I can read all that like english, and pretty much like 99% of the stuff that its linked too.... and pretty much the level behind that which generates what you see. And the level behind that which is the database itself. That's where I'm fluent. The level behind that, which is the server stuff, I can semi-read (for lack of a better expression) but not enough to say its part of my job. The next layer behind that, the operating system, I can read, and the final layer which is the hardware, I don't have a clue.
It's more Inception than Matrix =)
( , Fri 4 May 2012, 22:35, Reply)
I think that would probably make sense
if my brain hadn't given up for the weekend.
( , Fri 4 May 2012, 22:22, Reply)
if my brain hadn't given up for the weekend.
( , Fri 4 May 2012, 22:22, Reply)
Hah, no worries, if you want any help or advice, I can give it.
I found a wicked programing learning tool last week which is what I'd be learning if I was starting out and not already good at what I do.
( , Fri 4 May 2012, 22:36, Reply)
I found a wicked programing learning tool last week which is what I'd be learning if I was starting out and not already good at what I do.
( , Fri 4 May 2012, 22:36, Reply)
« Go Back | See The Full Thread