Add the flag "foodAll" BIT to the person table (or whatever you call it) and
as soon as you add a new food you need to scan all persons that have the
flag of "fooAll" set to 1 and add a relation for that new food.
If this is the way you need to go I would work with a trigger on the food
table ;-))
That is, if you think that "All Foods" means all foods at the time the
person signed up, or at anytime in the future.
I'm not sure how your app works, but to me "All Foods" would mean all those
foods in the db at the time I clicked "All Foods" if that makes any sense?
But your app could work differently, only you know.
Taco Fleur
Blog <http://www.tacofleur.com/index/blog/>
http://www.tacofleur.com/index/blog/
Methodology http://www.tacofleur.com/index/methodology/
0421 851 786
Tell me and I will forget
Show me and I will remember
Teach me and I will learn
-----Original Message-----
From: John Quarto-vonTivadar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, 26 January 2004 12:01 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: How to model "all" in a many-to-many
> And I'd suggest you stick non plural naming anywhere, because as soon as
you
> start to use plural naming you will have to start thinking "now what did I
> use there, food or foods?" Stick to non-plural...
I used to use plurals all the time, and then realized that I hated dealing
with irregular English plurals: "Cities" seemed wrong, even if
grammatically correct. And after about 2 days (and numerous slaps from
co-workers) I got convinced that "Citys" was even wrong-er. :) So on to
Singular I went, being fairly well convinced via the "each record is only
one City, not multiple ones" argument
Taco, I still don't get what you're suggesting to do when a new Food is
added *after* BigBob gets assigned to all foods: are you suggesting the SP
route?
_____
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
