But that would also allow multiple logins for the same customer, which I don't. Its a one to many only. So it doesn't need a separate table.
-----Original Message----- From: "Kristina D. H. Anderson" <k...@kacomputerconsulting.com> Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2009 19:12:34 To: NYPHP Talk<talk@lists.nyphp.org> Subject: Re: [nyphp-talk] Database, table, and column naming schemes If each customer can have more than 1 login ID, then normalization dictates a separate table, let's call it login , with fields login_id customer_id login_time login_IP session_id or whatever you store related to Logins, i.e. one row for each time the customer logs in, with their permanent customer_id and the assigned login_id for that session. Each time they login, the table generates a new row, with a new login_id, and associates it with their customer_id. So you can then do a query and find ALL the times each customer logged in. Unless you're overwriting the login_id in the customer table each time, and not storing the historical data...but usually that would not be the case. Kristina > Login ID is a field inside customer and can be set multiple times per customer record. > > -----Original Message----- > From: "Kristina D. H. Anderson" <k...@kacomputerconsulting.com> > > Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2009 18:46:25 > To: NYPHP Talk<talk@lists.nyphp.org> > Subject: Re: [nyphp-talk] Database, table, and column naming schemes > > > OK. Is login_id equivalent to customer_id, or is it generated anew > upon each login and then associated with a customer profile? Does > each customer have only 1 account? > > Kristina > > > Right. I want to do it that way on purpose. Because where I tie the > accounts together is by login id. But most of the time the customer > information changes per account even if its the same person. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: "Kristina D. H. Anderson" <k...@kacomputerconsulting.com> > > > > Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2009 17:40:45 > > To: NYPHP Talk<talk@lists.nyphp.org> > > Subject: Re: [nyphp-talk] Database, table, and column naming schemes > > > > > > You could have a table account_type which has primary key > > account_type_id, and a table account which has primary key account_id > > and then a lookup field in account which holds the relevant > > account_type_id... > > > > That way in table customer you just need a lookup field on account_id > > because there is already a relationship in place to find the type of > > account based on that value...I think that's what Tedd just said in > > essence as well. > > > > Although this structure is certainly presupposing that each customer > > has only one account. > > > > Kristina > > > > > At 11:56 AM -0400 9/13/09, Matt Juszczak wrote: > > > >>Plus, if you're going to be consistent with that "mistake", then > > > >>your naming should be: > > > >> > > > >>customer_customer > > > >>customer_account > > > >>customer_account_type > > > > > > > >I disagree. I wasn't trying to create "customer" as a prefix. I > > > >was simply renaming the tables based on the one:many relationships > I > > > >have inside the tables. > > > > > > > >account > > > >account_type > > > >customer > > > > > > > >since customer stores an account_id, and account stores an > > > >account_type id, I could have picked customer to be the main level > > > >table, and just references out from there: > > > > > > Mat: > > > > > > Main level table? > > > > > > I think that's one of the problems. There is no main level table - - > > > there are just tables. It should not make any difference if you are > > > addressing customers, accounts, account_types, emails, or whatever. > > > They are nothing more than data and each has there own > relationships. > > > > > > Also, I think I see another problem. The account table holds the > > > account_type, right? > > > > > > If so, then your customer table should only contain the account_id, > > > but NOT the account_type_id -- that's redundant. > > > > > > To access what account-type the customer has means you pull the > > > account_id from the customer table -- then look up that account > > > (using the account_id ) in the account table -- then pull the > > > account_type_id and then find the account-type via it's id > > > (account_type_id) from the account type table. Understand. > > > > > > customer: account_id > > > account: account_type_id > > > account_type: type > > > > > > In any event, that's the way I would do it. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > tedd > > > > > > -- > > > ------- > > > http://sperling.com http://ancientstones.com > http://earthstones.com > > > _______________________________________________ > > > New York PHP User Group Community Talk Mailing List > > > http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/talk > > > > > > http://www.nyphp.org/show_participation.php > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > New York PHP User Group Community Talk Mailing List > > http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/talk > > > > http://www.nyphp.org/show_participation.php > > _______________________________________________ > > New York PHP User Group Community Talk Mailing List > > http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/talk > > > > http://www.nyphp.org/show_participation.php > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > New York PHP User Group Community Talk Mailing List > http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/talk > > http://www.nyphp.org/show_participation.php > _______________________________________________ > New York PHP User Group Community Talk Mailing List > http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/talk > > http://www.nyphp.org/show_participation.php > > _______________________________________________ New York PHP User Group Community Talk Mailing List http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/talk http://www.nyphp.org/show_participation.php _______________________________________________ New York PHP User Group Community Talk Mailing List http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/talk http://www.nyphp.org/show_participation.php
