Consider each of the takes and teaches relations as a fact table; they do not have an explicit measure attribute, but assume each table has a measure attribute reg_count whose value is always 1. What would the dimension attributes and dimension tables be in each case. Would the resultant schemas be star schemas or snowflake schemas?

Consider each of the takes and teaches relations as a fact table; they do not have an explicit measure attribute, but assume each table has a measure attribute reg_count whose value is always 1. What would the dimension attributes and dimension tables be in each case. Would the resultant schemas be star schemas or snowflake schemas?

Fundamentals of Information Systems

9th Edition

ISBN:9781337097536

Author:Ralph Stair, George Reynolds

Publisher:Ralph Stair, George Reynolds

Chapter3: Database Systems And Big Data

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 4SAT

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

Consider the relation r(A, B, C) with the attribute A as the index. Give an example of a query that can be answered only by looking at the index, rather than the tuples in the relationship. (Index-only plans are query plans that just utilise the index and do not access the actual relation.)
Can the foreign key be extracted from another table that is not connected to it in entity relationship diagram
What are the four steps in transforming anE-R diagram into normalized relations?
Convert the ER diagram to relations in the normal manner to capture as many constraints as possible, and then identify which of the answers is a relation schema. A. Dependents(ID, name, bDate) B. Employees(ID, name, street, city, state, phones, sDate, lengthEmp) C. Coverage(ID, name) D. Employees(ID, name, street, city, state, sDate, lengthEmp)
What is a criterion of a table being in first normal form? All transitive functional dependencies of a non-prime attribute of a super key should be removed. For every functional dependency where X is functionally dependent on Y, X should be the super key of the table. No non-prime attributes dependent on the candidate key should be included. Every cell of a table should have a single value.
Use normalization to decompose a relation with anomalies into well-structured relations?
Show that if a relation has no attribute that is functionally determined by all the other attributes, then the relation has no nontrivial FD’s at all.
Consider two relations Order and Product with the schema Order (Oid, Odate, Pid, qty) and Product (Pid, manufacturer_id, unit_price). i) Can the Oid attribute in the relation Order be a candidate key of the relation? Justify your answer. ii) Can the Pid attribute in the relation Product be a candidate key of the relation? Justify your answer. iii) Find the candidate key for the relation Product. iv) Using the primary keys identified for the above relations write a SQL query that retrieves all tuples of the form (Oid, Odate, Pid, unit_price).
Give examples of relations (tables) that could have more than one candidate key.
which rules apply to desigining table with less redundancy? a) Binary Relationship b) Reflective Relationship c) Weak entity d) Normal form
Using the relations ATTACHED, normalize your relations into first, second, and third normal forms. First, KINDLY describe the changes required to your relations to meet the standard of the first 1NF and then 2NF and lastly 3NF. Then, you should provide an Entity Relationship diagram that is in 3NF. All attributes, entities, keys, and relationships should be included and labelled. Hint: Remember that in the hospital software system, the “Patient” relation includes the “medicines” attribute and the “Appointment” relation includes the “allergies” attribute. Allergies describe a list of any known allergies and medicines describe a list of medicines prescribed for a patient. Please add: Define or describe the changes required to get the relations into the 1st normal form. Define or describe the changes required to get the relations into the 2nd normal form. Include an Entity Relationship diagram in the 3rd normal form. The primary and foreign keys, at a minimum, are defined for each…
In SQL, foreign key constraints can reference only the primary key attributes ofthe referenced relation or other attributes declared to be a superkey using theunique constraint. As a result, total participation constraints on a many-to-manyrelationship set (or on the “one” side of a one-to-many relationship set) cannotbe enforced on the relations created from the relationship set, using primarykey, foreign key, and not null constraints on the relations. Explain how to enforce total participation constraints using complexcheck constraints or assertions (see Section 4.4.8). (Unfortunately, thesefeatures are not supported on any widely used database currently.)