Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I'm thinking maybe I'm going about this wrong, so here it goes.

 

I have a table, lets call it actions, defined with only a couple fields (id, summary). 

 

Data would be like:

 

1 Update

2 Follow Up

3 Close

....

 

I have a table with a number or fields that would reference actions.  Ultimately this is for a review of sorts.  I need to have about 10-15 fields reference the available 'actions' as defined in the actions table.  Would I have to define each foreign key separately, or is there a better way to accomplish what I want.

 

Table 2 has a number for foreign keys.

 

field 1 => action

field 2 => action

field 3 => action

 

So the constraints look like

 

foreign key (field1) references actions(id)

foreign key (field2) references actions(id)

foreign key (field3) references actions(id)

 

I thought this could be written as:

 

foreign key(field1, field2, field2) references actions(id), but apparently I was sadly mistaken.

 

I've been away from any type of dev for a while, so any thoughts would be appreciated.

foreign key (field1) references actions(id)
foreign key (field2) references actions(id)
foreign key (field3) references actions(id)

 

That is indeed correct.

 

foreign key(field1, field2, field3) references actions(id, id2, id3)

 

This would be used for compound keys.

Ok, I for whatever reason just feel like I'm going about the design wrong, I guess because I never had to build a table like this.  We use an internal system with a number of fields that we need to conduct reviews on.  Each of these will be 'graded' with a follow up action.  I guess this is the only real way to do it, just wanted to be sure.  Thanks for the answer.

could you post your tables and what are you trying to do exactly?.... a first glance and based only in the small piece of information that you posted the design seems very curious imho

 

What I'm really doing is creating an enum of sorts.  I just need that enum to be flexible which is why I'm using another table to populate it.  The extraneous data is someone irrelevant.  Ultimately this is a relation between 2 tables.

 

<table1>

id

action

 

<table2>

id

field1

field2

field3

....

 

The values for table2 will be driven from the options available in table1.

Why then not do something like:

 

fields

field_id

field_name

 

actions

action_id

action_name

 

fields_actions

field_id

action_id

 

I think this is what I was looking for.  Was having a mental block.  Thanks ignace.  I think though this leads to an additional table.  Table 2 in my scenario also has additional data, for example notes, creation date, etc...

jcombs you would help us to help you if you would post some more information than just those little pieces of information. Give us an ERD to look at and we can help you normalize it and/or provide advice/suggestions in how to improve the design.

jcombs you would help us to help you if you would post some more information than just those little pieces of information. Give us an ERD to look at and we can help you normalize it and/or provide advice/suggestions in how to improve the design.

 

I don't have an ER to post, but what I'm looking to is a review for a call center type system. This system has a number of fields that the support person must fill out (A CRM for Technical Support).  There are a few tables that I need.

 

[Employees]

name, login, etc

 

[Cases]

Case number, details, etc

 

[Review]

Review Date

Employee

Case Number

Case Summary <field in CRM>

Problem Detail <field in CRM>

Last Action <field in CRM>

Notes

Action

 

An employee can own many cases and there can be multiple reviews done for each case over time.  Within the review the CRM fields will be graded with a list of actions to choose from.  This then leads to the actions table.  This was the list can be flexible and added to as needed rather than using something like an enum. 

 

I like the concept of the many to many for fields <-> actions, but i'm struggling with the fact that a review will contain many fields from the CRM as well as additional data (Notes, Action Plan, etc).  There are more details/tables that I don't feel are relevant to this particular relation. 

 

I thought about just handling this in PHP (just query the actions table to create the dropdowns for the input form and just use a varchar for the grading system in the table), but I didn't think this would be good design. 

 

Does this make sense what I'm trying to accomplish?

This thread is more than a year old. Please don't revive it unless you have something important to add.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.