Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)
Tom,
Thanks for taking the time to elaborate on this approach. I could not infer from previous posts that what you described in detail was suggested.
This does seem like the most...
May 16, 2013 at 12:06 pm
ChrisM@Work (4/26/2013)
Those are 'organisations'...
Well, not quite. There could be multiple regional offices for "Organizations", with each one having their own unique set of phone numbers. Again, for the purposes of...
April 26, 2013 at 8:14 am
ChrisM@Work (4/26/2013)[/b
Look at the work you will have to do when you want to bring each of those phone numbers into line with a parent row:
SELECT p.*,
[mobile 1]= f1.PhoneNum,
[mobile...
April 26, 2013 at 8:10 am
patrickmcginnis59 10839 (4/26/2013)
This is an interesting case, so I'm guessing that it really depends on how important the functionality of the foreign key constraint is for your needed functionality. If...
April 26, 2013 at 8:06 am
Although I agree in principle that most common scenario regarding phone numbers is that there is one per person, in the system that I am designing that is just not...
April 26, 2013 at 7:30 am
Sean Lange (4/25/2013)
Personally I think this over complicates this greatly. The number of rows sharing the same phone number is likely going to be relatively small. There will be a...
April 25, 2013 at 10:51 am
ChrisM@Work (4/25/2013)
April 25, 2013 at 10:40 am
Well, first they are not many to many then, and second it constrains the software development due to the inability for code reuse.
April 25, 2013 at 9:20 am
Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)