Formulate Index Value

[NeoPa]

As stated earlier, I am a total novice. I have no idea what those * means. I just copied and pasted as I saw it fit without researching or understanding the impact of it.

I was wondering, once we are done fine tuning this CD database, will it be okay with you to have a look at my other database for the DVDs? I have not entered much data into it. But I don't want to add to it without some expert's (like yourself) blessings first. You don't have to say "yes" or OK now.

But first I would like to incorporate your suggested remedies for my present predicaments.

Thank you so much.

Sounds like a plan. Get your latest understanding into it first though, then we can check it over. It's easier finding problems though of course. Checking out a working database design is a very large task. We'll get to this later anyway.

[MNNovice]

What I mean is to rename "Karen Carpenters" to "Karen Carpenter". "Carpenters " is only used for the group name.

PS: I like to listen to her too :)

That has to be a typo. I will fix it. Thanks.

[MNNovice]

I will help where I can. My first suggestion would be to create a link and play with the options. This gives a fair understanding of what's available.

I will see if I can post a version without the data in as a template.

That will be great.

Speaking of relationship of tables in ACCESS. I know it's the most important thing to understand thoroughly. But I find it very complex to understand, even though it apparently seems simple. Will you agree?

Can you recommend an article or a book where this is explained more clearly for people like me? I need a write up that explains with examples.

Thanks.

[MNNovice]

Sounds like a plan. Get your latest understanding into it first though, then we can check it over. It's easier finding problems though of course. Checking out a working database design is a very large task. We'll get to this later anyway.

I will work on it and shall post my views, questions and problems when we decide to discuss that database.

Thanks.

ps: Iowa was very boring. We returned home early Sunday evening. But I have never been there before...theref ore, something new to discover is always exciting.

[NeoPa]

Can you recommend an article or a book where this is explained more clearly for people like me? I need a write up that explains with examples.

I would strongly recommend Normalisation and Table structures. This may not be the whole answer to your question, but it is a brilliant starting point. Let me know how you get on with it.

[NeoPa]

ps: Iowa was very boring. We returned home early Sunday evening. But I have never been there before...theref ore, something new to discover is always exciting.

I'm sorry to hear that, but as you say, new things are never entirely without interest :)

On to a technical issue.

Having looked more deeply at your table layouts I now understand my confusion earlier when I was struggling to understand the logical link between the [tblCDDetails], [tblSongs] and [tblSonsDetails] tables.

Am I right in thinking the [SongID] field of [tblCDDetails] is entirely redundant (and possibly a stone in the shoe)? I can't see what possible reason it could have for existing there.

[NeoPa]

I have attached a skeleton db (ZIP) with very little but the tables and the Relationships set up in it.

I have removed the field [SongID] from the [tblCDDetails] table. I have NOT linked the two extra fields ([MusicCategoryID] & [RecordingArtist ID]) from [tblSongs] as I feel they are probably a confusion. We should probably sort that out at some stage, but it's only logically appropriate to have such fields if they are treated as comletely separate from the fields of the same name in [tblCDDetails].

PS. Added attachment. Use your given name as a password (Case sensitive).

[NeoPa]

I have tested with this after adding back in the data and the other objects. It had the same problem :(

[MNNovice]

I would strongly recommend Normalisation and Table structures. This may not be the whole answer to your question, but it is a brilliant starting point. Let me know how you get on with it.

I have downloaded a copy. I will get back with my comments on it. Thanks.

[NeoPa]

Is that the database, or the quoted link M? :S

[MNNovice]

On to a technical issue.

Having looked more deeply at your table layouts I now understand my confusion earlier when I was struggling to understand the logical link between the [tblCDDetails], [tblSongs] and [tblSonsDetails] tables.

Am I right in thinking the [SongID] field of [tblCDDetails] is entirely redundant (and possibly a stone in the shoe)? I can't see what possible reason it could have for existing there.

I originally started this DB two years ago. I had very little understanding of how a DB works. I just copies things blindly. I developed an understanding of it as things progressed. But I only went back to correcting/cleaning as needed and not thoroughly as I should have. Perhaps, I was destined to come across a Pro like yourself to help me out…. What you are saying here make sense and I will delete the field [SongID] from tblCDDetails.

[MNNovice]

I have attached a skeleton db (ZIP) with very little but the tables and the Relationships set up in it.

I have removed the field [SongID] from the [tblCDDetails] table. I have NOT linked the two extra fields ([MusicCategoryID] & [RecordingArtist ID]) from [tblSongs] as I feel they are probably a confusion. We should probably sort that out at some stage, but it's only logically appropriate to have such fields if they are treated as comletely separate from the fields of the same name in [tblCDDetails].

PS. Added attachment. Use your given name as a password (Case sensitive).

I have downloaded the skeleton DB. Shall try to understand the newly defined relationship once I read (and understand) the article you sent.

To further evaluate the relevance of these fields I think I need to bring some reports to your attentions. These reports are critical for me. You may then tell me whether these fields are redundant or not. I surely don’t have the technical expertise to figure it out myself.

I have several reports that may be linked in more than one way. If you select “Preview Reports” from the main switchboard and then select “Selected Report”, you will be prompted to a form with 4 different tabs: “Artist, Category, CD Title and Songs”. You can generate various reports using different criteria on each of these tabs.

Example 1: From the tab called: CD Titles
You can select a CD Title and see what songs are there on a given CD and who the singer(s) are. This report is based on two tables: tblCDDetails & tblSongsDetails (field that joins this two tables is: [RecordingID]

Example 2: From the tab called: Artist

A report can be generated to display various CDs including track info by a selected an Artist. Try artist: Hemanta Mukherjee.