My database classes were nearly a decade ago and I was never very good
with normalization to begin with. I could use some help with this:

I am writing a db to keep track of automated teller machines: what
version of software they use, what hardware they use, the last time they
were serviced, where they're located, etc.

We deal with multiple banks and credit unions. Most of these financial
institutions have several locations. Each of these locations have at
least one ATM, sometimes several for the larger/busier branches.

As I understand things, the ATM records will have many-to-one
relationship with the locations record , and the locations records with
also have a many-to-one relationship with the financial institution
record. Am I incorrect?

--
Charles W. Stricklin
Systems Engineer
Bank-Tec South
www.bank-tecsouth.com

Sounds correct to me.



On Mon, 09 May 2005 10:25:29 -0500, "Charles W. Stricklin"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>My database classes were nearly a decade ago and I was never very good
>with normalization to begin with. I could use some help with this:
>
>I am writing a db to keep track of automated teller machines: what
>version of software they use, what hardware they use, the last time they
>were serviced, where they're located, etc.
>
>We deal with multiple banks and credit unions. Most of these financial
>institutions have several locations. Each of these locations have at
>least one ATM, sometimes several for the larger/busier branches.
>
>As I understand things, the ATM records will have many-to-one
>relationship with the locations record , and the locations records with
>also have a many-to-one relationship with the financial institution
>record. Am I incorrect?


**********************
(E-Mail Removed)
remove uppercase letters for true email
http://www.geocities.com/jacksonmacd/ for info on MS Access security

Charles,

> As I understand things, the ATM records will have many-to-one
> relationship with the locations record , and the locations records with
> also have a many-to-one relationship with the financial institution
> record. Am I incorrect?

You're not incorrect.

> My database classes were nearly a decade ago and I was never very good
> with normalization to begin with. I could use some help with this:

Well, you seem to be doing good so far as I can tell.
I tell ya, normalization is overrated... :-)

Immanuel Sibero





"Charles W. Stricklin" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
message news:eO%(E-Mail Removed)...
> My database classes were nearly a decade ago and I was never very good
> with normalization to begin with. I could use some help with this:
>
> I am writing a db to keep track of automated teller machines: what
> version of software they use, what hardware they use, the last time they
> were serviced, where they're located, etc.
>
> We deal with multiple banks and credit unions. Most of these financial
> institutions have several locations. Each of these locations have at
> least one ATM, sometimes several for the larger/busier branches.
>
> As I understand things, the ATM records will have many-to-one
> relationship with the locations record , and the locations records with
> also have a many-to-one relationship with the financial institution
> record. Am I incorrect?
>
> --
> Charles W. Stricklin
> Systems Engineer
> Bank-Tec South
> www.bank-tecsouth.com