Home
FAQ
Search
Register
Log inallocating or bridge table?
Page 1 of 1 • Share •
allocating or bridge table?
dellsters on Fri May 29, 2009 10:49 am
I'm trying to decide whether I should allocate or use a bridge table in my star schema.
From a business perspective, the most granular level is at the visit level. A visit can have multiple procedures.
It doesn't make sense to bring the grain to the procedure level. I'm wondering if I should just use a bridge table and keep the grain at visit level.
From a business perspective, the most granular level is at the visit level. A visit can have multiple procedures.
It doesn't make sense to bring the grain to the procedure level. I'm wondering if I should just use a bridge table and keep the grain at visit level.
Last edited by dellsters on Thu Apr 08, 2010 9:35 am; edited 1 time in total
dellsters- Posts: 39
Join date: 2009-02-11 
Re: allocating or bridge table?
BoxesAndLines on Sun May 31, 2009 7:28 pm
Use a bridge table. It is the perfect situation for its use. Allocation makes no sense as there is nothing to allocate.
BoxesAndLines- Posts: 868
Join date: 2009-02-03
Location: USA -
Similar topics» help!!!!for 3dmax rendering; error allocating mesh. Insufficient memory available. Reduce the face count to render this scene.
» allocating or bridge table?
» Multivalued Dimension, bridge table, and constraints using SQL Server 2005
» Bridge table for INSURANCE
» Bridge Table and Customer Hierarchy
» allocating or bridge table?
» Multivalued Dimension, bridge table, and constraints using SQL Server 2005
» Bridge table for INSURANCE
» Bridge Table and Customer Hierarchy
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum