Various Relationship in SQL - sql

I'm new to SQL Server and Entity Framework.
Suppose I have 2 tables named tblOfficeAccessType and tblOfficeAccessDepartment. I introduce them in this picture.
I put some data in tables as instance. In tblOfficeAccessType we have the access codes to office and in tblOfficeAccessDepartment we have various departments of office. we want that the User could define various access levels for each AccessCode. For example The User could define the [AccessCode = AQ1] allows to access to the Manager_Room but It does not allow to access to the Store. Note that various offices have various departments and various Users have Various selections. How do that?
CREATE TABLE [dbo].[tblOfficeAccessDepartment]
(
[DepartmentId] VARCHAR (10) NOT NULL,
[DepartmentName] VARCHAR (50) NOT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED ([DepartmentId] ASC)
);
CREATE TABLE [dbo].[tblOfficeAccessType]
(
[AccessId] VARCHAR (10) NOT NULL,
[AccessCode] VARCHAR (50) NOT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED ([AccessId] ASC)
);
Update :
I want something like this

Related

Retrieving data from a many-to-many relationship in a recipes database

I am attempting to create a recipes database where a user can input ingredients and it will output a list of potential recipes. I have created three tables:
CREATE TABLE [dbo].[Ingredients] (
[Ingredient_ID] INT IDENTITY (1, 1) NOT NULL,
[Name] VARCHAR (50) NOT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED ([Ingredient_ID] ASC)
);
CREATE TABLE [dbo].[recipes] (
[Recipe_ID] INT IDENTITY (1, 1) NOT NULL,
[Name] VARCHAR (50) NOT NULL,
[Instructions] TEXT NULL,
[Preperation_Time] FLOAT (53) NULL,
[Author] VARCHAR (50) NULL,
CONSTRAINT [PK.recipes] PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED ([Recipe_ID] ASC)
);
CREATE TABLE [dbo].[RecipeIngredients] (
[Recipe_ID] INT NOT NULL,
[Ingredient_ID] INT NOT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED ([Recipe_ID] ASC, [Ingredient_ID] ASC),
CONSTRAINT [FK_RecipeIngredients_To_Ingredients] FOREIGN KEY ([Ingredient_ID]) REFERENCES [dbo].[Ingredients] ([Ingredient_ID]),
CONSTRAINT [FK_RecipeIngredients_To_Recipes] FOREIGN KEY ([Recipe_ID]) REFERENCES [dbo].[recipes] ([Recipe_ID])
);
I have populated all tables and I am now attempting to retrieve the recipes based on what the user has entered.
I have a created a test SQL statement to retrieve all recipes that contain 'Eggs' using:
string sqlString = "SELECT recipes.Name, Instructions, recipes.Preperation_Time, Author FROM RecipeIngredients" +
" INNER JOIN recipes ON recipes.Recipe_ID = RecipeIngredients.Recipe_ID" +
" INNER JOIN Ingredients ON Ingredients.Ingredient_ID = RecipeIngredients.Ingredient_ID" +
" WHERE ingredients.Name = 'Eggs'";
The data does not show up in my dataGridView, but I am unsure if it is because the statement is wrong or other factors.
Is the statement correct? I am unfamiliar with the INNER JOIN command.
I am also unsure how to design an Sql statement that can take a varying amount of ingredient names without creating an Sql statement for every possibility.
Thanks in advance, if you need me to expand on anything I have asked please ask.
Here is the query that should work. Use of aliases is recommended
SELECT r.Name, r.Instructions, r.Preperation_Time, r.Author
FROM Ingredients i
join RecipeIngredients ri on i.Ingredient_ID = ri.Ingredient_ID
join recipes r on ri.Recipe_ID = r.Recipe_ID
where i.Name = 'Eggs'
You may want to run it through SQL Server Management Studio to ascertain return of result before coding it in C# solution.

One to many to many relationship, with composite keys

In my game, an archetype is a collection of associated traits, an attack type, a damage type, and a resource type. Each piece of data is unique to each
archetype. For example, the Mage archetype might look like the following:
archetype: Mage
attack: Targeted Area Effect
damage: Shock
resource: Mana
trait_defense: Willpower
trait_offense: Intelligence
This is the archetype table in SQLite syntax:
create table archetype
(
archetype_id varchar(16) not null,
attack_id varchar(16) not null,
damage_id varchar(16) not null,
resource_type_id varchar(16) not null,
trait_defense_id varchar(16) not null,
trait_offense_id varchar(16) not null,
archetype_description varchar(128),
constraint pk_archetype primary key (archetype_id),
constraint uk_archetype unique (attack_id, damage_id,
resource_type_id,
trait_defense_id,
trait_offense_id)
);
The primary key should be the complete composite, but I do not want to pass
all the data around to other tables unless necessary. For example, there are
crafting skills associated with each archetype which do not need to know any
other archetype data.
An effect is a combat outcome that can be applied to a friend or foe. An effect has an application type (instant, overtime), a type (buff, debuff, harm, heal, etc.) and a detail describing to which stat the effect applies. It also has most of the archetype data to make each effect unique. Also included is the associated trait used for progress and skill checks. For example, an effect might look like:
apply: Instant
type: Harm
detail: Health
archetype: Mage
attack_id: Targeted Area Effect
damage_id: Shock
resource: Mana
trait_id: Intelligence
This is the effect table in SQLite syntax:
create table effect
(
effect_apply_id varchar(16) not null,
effect_type_id varchar(16) not null,
effect_detail_id varchar(16) not null,
archetype_id varchar(16) not null,
attack_id varchar(16) not null,
damage_id varchar(16) not null,
resource_type_id varchar(16) not null,
trait_id varchar(16),
constraint pk_effect primary key(archetype_id, effect_type_id,
effect_detail_id, effect_apply_id,
attack_id, damage_id, resource_type_id),
constraint fk_effect_archetype_id foreign key(archetype_id, attack_id,
damage_id, resource_type_id)
references archetype (archetype_id, attack_id,
damage_id, resource_type_id)
);
An ability is a container that can hold multiple effects. There is no limit to
the kinds of effects it can hold, e.g. having both Mage and Warrior effects in
the same ability, or even having two of the same effects, is fine. Each effect
in the ability is going to have the archetype data, and the effect data.
Again.
Ability tables in SQLite syntax:
create table ability
(
ability_id varchar(64),
ability_description varchar(128),
constraint pk_ability primary key (ability_id)
);
create table ability_effect
(
ability_effect_id integer primary key autoincrement,
ability_id varchar(64) not null,
archetype_id varchar(16) not null,
effect_type_id varchar(16) not null,
effect_detail_id varchar(16) not null,
effect_apply_id varchar(16) not null,
attack_id varchar(16) not null,
damage_id varchar(16) not null,
resource_type_id varchar(16) not null,
trait_id varchar(16),
constraint fk_ability_effect_ability_id foreign key (ability_id)
references ability (ability_id),
constraint fk_ability_effect_effect_id foreign key (archetype_id,
effect_type_id,
effect_detail_id,
effect_apply_id)
references effect (archetype_id,
effect_type_id,
effect_detail_id,
effect_apply_id)
);
This is basically a one to many to many relationship, so I needed a technical
key to have duplicate effects in the ability_effect table.
Questions:
1) Is there a better way to design these tables to avoid the duplication of
data over these three tables?
2) Should these tables be broken down further?
3) Is it better to perform multiple table lookups to collect all the data? For example, just passing around the archetype_id and doing lookups for the data when necessary (which will be often).
UPDATE:
I actually do have parent tables for attacks, damage, etc. I removed those
tables and their related indexes from the sample to make the question clean,
concise, and focused on my duplicate data issue.
I was trying to avoid each table having both an id and a name, as both would be candidate keys and so having both would be wasted space. I was trying to keep the SQLite database as small as possible. (Hence, the many "varchar(16)"
declarations, which I now know SQLite ignores.) It seems in SQLite having both
values is unavoidable, unless being twice as slow is somehow ok when using the
WITHOUT ROWID option during table creation. So, I will rewrite my database to
use ids and names via the rowid implementation.
Thanks for your input guys!
1) Is there a better way to design these tables to avoid the
duplication of data over these three tables?
and also
2) Should these tables be broken down further?
It would appear so.
It would appear Mage is a unique archtype, as is Warrior. (based upon For example, the Mage archetype might look like the following:).
As such why not make the archtype_id a primary key and then reference the attack type, damage etc from tables for these. i.e. have an attack table and a damage table.
So you could, for example, have something like (simplified for demonstration) :-
DROP TABLE IF EXISTS archtype;
DROP TABLE IF EXISTS attack;
DROP TABLE IF EXISTS damage;
CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS attack (attack_id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, attack_name TEXT, a_more_columns TEXT);
INSERT INTO attack (attack_name, a_more_columns) VALUES
('Targetted Affect','ta blah'), -- id 1
('AOE','aoe blah'), -- id 2
('Bounce Effect','bounce blah') -- id 3
;
CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS damage (damage_id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, damage_name TEXT, d_more_columns TEXT);
INSERT INTO damage (damage_name,d_more_columns) VALUES
('Shock','shock blah'), -- id 1
('Freeze','freeze blah'), -- id 2
('Fire','fire blah'), -- id 3
('Hit','hit blah')
;
CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS archtype (id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, archtype_name TEXT, attack_id_ref INTEGER, damage_id_ref INTEGER, at_more_columns TEXT);
INSERT INTO archtype (archtype_name,attack_id_ref,damage_id_ref,at_more_columns) VALUES
('Mage',1,1,'Mage blah'),
('Warrior',3,4,'Warrior Blah'),
('Dragon',2,3,'Dragon blah'),
('Iceman',2,2,'Iceman blah')
;
SELECT archtype_name, damage_name, attack_name FROM archtype JOIN damage ON damage_id_ref = damage_id JOIN attack ON attack_id_ref = attack_id;
Note that the aliases of rowid have been used for id's rather than the name as these are generally the most efficient.
The data for rowid tables is stored as a B-Tree structure containing one entry for each table row, using the rowid value as the key. This means that retrieving or sorting records by rowid is fast. Searching for a record with a specific rowid, or for all records with rowids within a specified range is around twice as fast as a similar search made by specifying any other PRIMARY KEY or indexed value. SQL As Understood By SQLite - CREATE TABLE- ROWIDs and the INTEGER PRIMARY KEY
A rowid is generated for all rows (unless WITHOUT ROWID is specified), by specifying ?? INTEGER PRIMARY KEY column ?? is an alias of the rowid.
Beware using AUTOINCREMENT, unlike other RDMS's that use this for automatically generating unique id's for rows. SQLite by default creates a unique id (the rowid). The AUTOINCREMENT keyword adds a constraint that ensures that the generated id is larger than the highest existing. To do this requires an additional table sqlite_sequence that has to be maintained and interrogated and as such has overheads. The AUTOINCREMENT keyword imposes extra CPU, memory, disk space, and disk I/O overhead and should be avoided if not strictly needed. It is usually not needed. SQLite Autoincrement
The query at the end will result in :-
Now say you wanted types to have multiple attacks and damages per type then the above could easily be adapted by using many-many relationships by introducing reference/mapping/link tables (all just different names for the same). Such a table will have two columns (sometime other columns for data specific to the distinct reference/map/link) one for the parent (archtype) reference/map/link and the other for the child (attack/damage) referenced/mapped/linked.
e.g. the following could be added :-
DROP TABLE IF EXISTS archtype_attack_reference;
CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS archtype_attack_reference
(aar_archtype_id INTEGER NOT NULL, aar_attack_id INTEGER NOT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY(aar_archtype_id,aar_attack_id))
WITHOUT ROWID;
DROP TABLE IF EXISTS archtype_damage_reference;
CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS archtype_damage_reference
(adr_archtype_id INTEGER NOT NULL, adr_damage_id INTEGER NOT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY(adr_archtype_id,adr_damage_id))
WITHOUT ROWID
;
INSERT INTO archtype_attack_reference VALUES
(1,1), -- Mage has attack Targetted
(1,3), -- Mage has attack Bounce
(3,2), -- Dragon has attack AOE
(2,1), -- Warrior has attack targetted
(2,2), -- Warrior has attack AOE
(4,2), -- Iceman has attack AOE
(4,3) -- Icemane has attack Bounce
;
INSERT INTO archtype_damage_reference VALUES
(1,1),(1,3), -- Mage can damage with Shock and Freeze
(2,4), -- Warrior can damage with Hit
(3,3),(3,4), -- Dragon can damage with Fire and Hit
(4,2),(4,4) -- Iceman can damage with Freeze and Hit
;
SELECT archtype_name, attack_name,damage_name FROM archtype
JOIN archtype_attack_reference ON archtype_id = aar_archtype_id
JOIN archtype_damage_reference ON archtype_id = adr_archtype_id
JOIN attack ON aar_attack_id = attack_id
JOIN damage ON adr_damage_id = damage_id
;
The query results in :-
With a slight change the above query could even be used to perform a random attack e.g. :-
SELECT archtype_name, attack_name,damage_name FROM archtype
JOIN archtype_attack_reference ON archtype_id = aar_archtype_id
JOIN archtype_damage_reference ON archtype_id = adr_archtype_id
JOIN attack ON aar_attack_id = attack_id
JOIN damage ON adr_damage_id = damage_id
ORDER BY random() LIMIT 1 -- ADDED THIS LINE
;
You could get :-
Another time you might get :-
3) Is it better to perform multiple table lookups to collect all the
data? For example, just passing around the archetype_id and doing
lookups for the data when necessary (which will be often).
That's pretty hard to say. You may initially think gather all the data once and keep it in memory say as an object. However, at times the underlying data may well already be in memory due to it being cached. Perhaps it could be better to utilise part of each. So I believe the answer is, you will need to test various scenarios.
I would probably avoid those composite primary keys.
And use the more commonly used integer with an autoincrement.
Then add the unique or non-unique composite indexes where needed.
Although i.m.h.o it's not always a bad idea to use a short CHAR or VARCHAR as the primary key in some cases. Mostly when easy to understand abbreviations can be used.
An example. Suppose you have a reference table for Countries. With a primary key on the 2 character CountryCode. Then when querying a table with a foreign key on that CountryCode, then for the human mind it's way easier to understand 'US' than some integer. Even without joining to Countries you'll probably know what Country is referenced.
So here are your tables with a slightly different layout.
create table archetype
(
archetype_id integer primary key autoincrement,
attack_id varchar(16) not null,
damage_id varchar(16) not null,
resource_type_id varchar(16) not null,
trait_defense_id varchar(16) not null,
trait_offense_id varchar(16) not null,
archetype_description varchar(128),
constraint uk_archetype unique (attack_id, damage_id,
resource_type_id,
trait_defense_id,
trait_offense_id)
);
create table effect
(
effect_id integer primary key autoincrement,
archetype_id integer not null, -- FK archetype
effect_apply_id varchar(16) not null,
effect_type_id varchar(16) not null,
effect_detail_id varchar(16) not null,
attack_id varchar(16) not null,
damage_id varchar(16) not null,
resource_type_id varchar(16) not null,
trait_id varchar(16),
constraint pk_effect unique(archetype_id, effect_type_id,
effect_detail_id, effect_apply_id,
attack_id, damage_id, resource_type_id),
constraint fk_effect_archetype_id foreign key(archetype_id)
references archetype (archetype_id)
);
create table ability
(
ability_id integer primary key autoincrement,
ability_description varchar(128)
);
create table ability_effect
(
ability_effect_id integer primary key autoincrement,
ability_id integer not null, -- FK ability
effect_id integer not null, -- FK effect
attack_id varchar(16) not null,
damage_id varchar(16) not null,
resource_type_id varchar(16) not null,
trait_id varchar(16),
constraint fk_ability_effect_ability_id foreign key (ability_id)
references ability (ability_id),
constraint fk_ability_effect_effect_id foreign key (effect_id)
references effect (effect_id)
);

Cretae Domains Table In HSQL includes the metadata of Domains Sytem View

I want to create a table named Domains in HSQL. But when i try to do so it includes 29 columns although my table definition specifies just 5.There is a Domains System View and it seems it is including these columns also in my metadata.Because of this i am not able to insert anything in my db as those unwanted columns from Domains System View also contain some non-null values.
I tried creating schema but it is not what i need as my solution.
I need to override this Domains System View or stop the metadata from picking it.
Does anyone know how can we do it?
I am stuck at it for more than few days now.
CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS Domains
(
domain_id INTEGER NOT NULL,
name VARCHAR(100) NOT NULL,
description VARCHAR(500) NOT NULL,
CREATED_BY VARCHAR(8) NOT NULL,
LAST_UPDATED_BY VARCHAR(8) NOT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY (domain_id)
);

PL/SQL function that returns a value from a table after a check

I am new to php and sql and I am building a little game to learn a little bit more of the latter.
This is my simple database of three tables:
-- *********** SIMPLE MONSTERS DATABASE
CREATE TABLE monsters (
monster_id VARCHAR(20),
haunt_spawn_point VARCHAR(5) NOT NULL,
monster_name VARCHAR(30) NOT NULL,
level_str VARCHAR(10) NOT NULL,
creation_date DATE NOT NULL,
CONSTRAINT monster_id_pk PRIMARY KEY (monster_id)
);
-- ****************************************
CREATE TABLE spawntypes (
spawn_point VARCHAR(5),
special_tresures VARCHAR (5) NOT NULL,
maximum_monsters NUMBER NOT NULL,
unitary_experience NUMBER NOT NULL,
CONSTRAINT spawn_point_pk PRIMARY KEY (spawn_point)
);
-- ****************************************
CREATE TABLE fights (
fight_id NUMBER,
my_monster_id VARCHAR(20),
foe_spawn_point VARCHAR(5),
foe_monster_id VARCHAR(20) NOT NULL,
fight_start TIMESTAMP NOT NULL,
fight_end TIMESTAMP NOT NULL,
total_experience NUMBER NOT NULL
loot_type NUMBER NOT NULL,
CONSTRAINT my_monster_id_fk FOREIGN KEY (my_monster_id)
REFERENCES monsters (monster_id),
CONSTRAINT foe_spawn_point_fk FOREIGN KEY (foe_spawn_point)
REFERENCES spawntypes (spawn_point),
CONSTRAINT fight_id_pk PRIMARY KEY (fight_id)
);
Given this data how can I easily carry out this two tasks:
1) I would like to create a pl/sql function that passing only a fight_id as a parameter and given the foe_spawn_point (inside the fight table) return the unitary_experience that is related to this spawn point referencing the spawntypes table, how can I do it? :-/ [f(x)]
In order to calculate the total experience earned from a fight (unitary_experience * fight_length) I have created a function that given a particular fight will subtract the fight_end with the fight_start so now I know how long the fight lasted. [f(y)]
2) is it possible to use this two functions (multiply the result that they returns) during the database population task?
INSERT INTO fights VALUES(.... , f(x) * f(y), 'loot A');
in order to populate all the total_experience entries inside the fights table?
thank you for your help
In SQL, you don't generally talk about building functions to do things. The building blocks of SQL are queries, views, and stored procedures (most SQL dialects do have functions, but that is not the place to start).
So, given a variable with $FIGHTID you would fetch the unitary experience with a simple query that uses the join operation:
select unitary_experience
from fight f join
spawnTypes st
on st.spawn_point = f.foe_spawn_point
where fightid = $FIGHTID
If you have a series of values to insert, along with a function, I would recommend using the select form of insert:
insert into fights(<list of columns, total_experience)
select <list of values>,
($FIGHT_END - $FIGHT_START) * (select unitary_experience from spawnTypes where spawnType ='$SPAWN_POINT)
One comment about the tables. It is a good idea for all the ids in the table to be integers that are auto-incremented. In Oracle you do this by creating a sequence (and it is simpler in most other databases).

store two values in one field sql

I have to create a table in sql where one of the columns stores awards for a movie. The schema says it should store something like Oscar, screenplay. Is it possible to store two values in the same field in SQL. If so what datatype would that be and how would you query the table for it?
It's a horrible design pattern to store more than one piece of data in a single column in a relational database. The exact design of your system depends on several things, but here is one possible way to model it:
CREATE TABLE Movie_Awards (
movie_id INT NOT NULL,
award_id INT NOT NULL,
CONSTRAINT PK_Movie_Awards PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED (movie_id, award_id)
)
CREATE TABLE Movies (
movie_id INT NOT NULL,
title VARCHAR(50) NOT NULL,
year_released SMALLINT NULL,
...
CONSTRAINT PK_Movies PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED (movie_id)
)
CREATE TABLE Awards (
award_id INT NOT NULL,
ceremony_id INT NOT NULL,
name VARCHAR(50) NOT NULL, -- Ex: Best Picture
CONSTRAINT PK_Awards PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED (award_id)
)
CREATE TABLE Ceremonies (
ceremony_id INT NOT NULL,
name VARCHAR(50) NOT NULL, -- Ex: "Academy Awards"
nickname VARCHAR(50) NULL, -- Ex: "Oscars"
CONSTRAINT PK_Ceremonies PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED (ceremony_id)
)
I didn't include Foreign Key constraints here, but hopefully they should be pretty obvious.
Anything's possible; that doesn't mean it's a good idea :)
Far better to normalize your structure and store types like so:
AwardTypes:
AwardTypeID
AwardTypeName
Movies:
MovieID
MovieName
MovieAwardType:
MovieID
AwardTypeID
You can serialize your data in Json format,store Json string, and deselialize on read. More sefer than using your own format
Data presentation does't have to be so close tied with phisical data organisation. Wouldn't it be bether to store these two data in two separate columns and then just do some kind of concatenation at the display time?
It is much less painfull to join data than to split it, if you happen to need just a screenplay, one day...