Hi Bruce,
You are correct that there can be many valid reasons for having that many
child tables. Probably because this is the New Users forum, I assumed (and we
know what that can mean) the the OP might have been doing something like a
table for each year or something.
Thanks for keeping me honest!
--
Jerry Whittle, Microsoft Access MVP
Light. Strong. Cheap. Pick two. Keith Bontrager - Bicycle Builder.
"BruceM via AccessMonster.com" wrote:
> Not meaning to be excessively picky, and with respect for your knowledge and
> experience as demonstrated by your posts over the years, is it unusual to
> have four child tables? I have at least one database with four, and several
> with three, and I don't think I'm operating at an especially sophisticated
> level as such things go.
>
> As an example of four child tables, a training database has a main Training
> Session record, with related records for documents (e.g. Standard Operating
> Procedures), PartNumber (we process machine parts, several of which may be
> related closely enough that they are covered by a single training session),
> trainers, and attendees.
>
> That said, I am curious too about the other tables the OP mentioned :-)
>
> Jerry Whittle wrote:
> >You shouldn't be creating a record in the other 4 tables unless there is a
> >real need for it.
> >
> >The best way to keep the tables linked is to first join them in the
> >Relationships Window with Referential Integrity enabled. Next create a form
> >based on the tblProjID table. On this form put subforms based on the other
> >tables.
> >
> >It's pretty unusual to have one table linked to 4 other tables in a
> >hub-and-spoke configuration. What is in the other tables?
> >> In an Access 2007 db, I have 5 tables, with Proj_No the Primary Key field in
> >> the main table tblProjID. It has 7 additional fields.
> >[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> >> Thank you
> >> Marsh
>
> --
> Message posted via AccessMonster.com
> http://www.accessmonster.com/Uwe/For...arted/201004/1
>
> .
>