could i convert an acess db to ER Diagram ? how?

[Emad_abu_elfawares]

could i convert an acess db to ER Diagram ? how?

 

[Albert D. Kallal]

could i convert an acess db to ER Diagram ? how?

You don't convert an access db to a ER diagram. However, can certainly (and
should) have a correct ER diagram of your database.

This feature of access can be found by using the database tools, and hitting
the relationships window. The relationships window in ms-access is the way
that you produce a ER diagram in ms-access.

tools->relationships window.

 

[Albert D. Kallal]

The relationships window isn't enough to call it an ER diagram. An ER
diagram is so much more.

This depends under what kind of context you're placing this under.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entity-relationship_diagram


The person did not ask for an application model (UML)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Modeling_Language


So, the poster asked for a ER diagram. In the context of databases and
ms-access, the relationship windows is a ER diagram of the tables.

If they're looking for an application modeling system, or some type of UML,
Then that is very much a different kind of question.

I also did not think it's that it's in the realm of necessarily that if you
have a database and the ER relationship diagram, then you necessarily have
the ability to produce a script that defines the underlying tables.

It's entirely possible that I am misinterpreting the general use of ER here.
The mere fact of being able to generate a relationship diagram between the
tables as far as I can tell represents an ER relationship diagram. The
issues of scripting or other issues are nice, but NOT necessarily part of
the actual process of producing and having a diagram that represents and
defines the relationships between your tables.

Since the relationship window in access does in fact allow one to define,
delete, and create those relationships and setup referential integrity
between tables, then I think this tool in access not only constitutes as
being able to make a ER diagram,but also as an ER diagramming tool "system"
in the context of a database system....

 

[Fred]

Chris,

Yes, but the "much more" is stuff that is not a part of the DB structure,
even though the DB structure could have been an end product of such. In my
opinion, whatever CAN be automatically derived from the DB structure does
show up in the relationships window, albeit with different symbology.

 

[Albert D. Kallal]

Chris,

Yes, but the "much more" is stuff that is not a part of the DB structure,
even though the DB structure could have been an end product of such. In
my
opinion, whatever CAN be automatically derived from the DB structure does
show up in the relationships window, albeit with different symbology.

This is not a big deal one way or the other. I am most certainly open to
being corrected in the "general" use of the term ER diagram....

I am not aware I am miss-using the term. I have used the term ER this way
for many years. here is a article I wrote 8 years ago, and I freely use the
term ER diagram

http://www.members.shaw.ca/AlbertKallal/Articles/PickSql/Appendex1.html

and

http://www.members.shaw.ca/AlbertKallal/Articles/PickSql/Appendex2.html

The definition of the wickipddia also seems to hint and support my "general"
use of the term...

As I said here I have absolutely zero ax to grind with Chris who helps out
so much in this newsgroups. I'm am 100% open to any kind of discussion that
corrects me and my use of the term ER here.

I'm not aware I'm using ER in the wrong context and wrongly applying the
concept to the relationship window in access.

However, as mentioned I am open and willing and most happy to be corrected
that I am misusing the concept of a ER diagram in regards to access in this
way...

 

[David W. Fenton]

1 - There are 5 different cardinalities for relationships. The
relationships window only shows 2 different possibilities.

1:1
1:N

Uh, what else is there? Jet does not support N:0, so please explain
what the other "cardinalities" are.

 

[David W. Fenton]

I am not aware I am miss-using the term.

You're not using it the way people use the term outside of Access
development. See also "data dictionary," and so forth.