Results 1 to 4 of 4
  1. #1
    2 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Indiana, USA
    Posts
    141
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    I was wondering if anyone has used one "central" table, with multiple fields, to feed multiple drop down combo boxes? Example: I have the needs for about 8 different types of records, where each field will feed its own individual combo box. They won't won't be on the same forms, but can be used on more then one form. I do not need to do any filtering on one combo box to populate a 2nd one...this is straight selection of a record. I also do not need an ID number in the table.

    So to clarify, its it feasible to put field A, B, C, etc.. in the same table, and then have Field A just load up combo box A, Field B for combo box B, and so on? I wondering if anyone else has done something similiar, and if anyone has known issues doing it this way. The main goal is to keep from creating multiple one-field tables.

    Thanks.

  2. #2
    Plutonium Lounger
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    84,353
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 29 Times in 29 Posts
    The problem with the one-table approach is that one field could have 37 different values, requiring 37 records, while another could have only 5 different values, so the field would be filled in 5 records while it would remain blank in the rest. It would also violate the principle that a row (record) contains logically related values.

    I'd prefer using different tables, even if they have only one column.

  3. #3
    2 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Indiana, USA
    Posts
    141
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Hans,

    Very valid point about the "open" records populating the combo box. Seperate tables it will be.

    Thanks.

  4. #4
    Gold Lounger
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Crystal Beach, FL, Florida, USA
    Posts
    3,436
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 34 Times in 34 Posts
    [quote name='SmokeEater' post='770354' date='13-Apr-2009 16:34']The main goal is to keep from creating multiple one-field tables.[/quote]
    The thing is, are you trying to solve a problem that isn't really a problem? It may seem more efficient, but in the database world, it really isn't. Plus, you've given up the possibility of enforcing referential integrity between your main table and the look-up values in this single table.
    Mark Liquorman
    See my website for Tips & Downloads and for my Liquorman Utilities.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •