 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
.NET Forum / Languages / C# / October 2007To hard-code or not for filtering out inactive records
At first, it's easy to say (have a policy) that we'll hard-code for statuscode='ACT' (or maybe instead statuscode <> 'INA') but I think that pigeonholes us and would cause limitations. Example: We want to develop an Employee search screen. Obviously, we don't want inactive records to be displayed. The tables look like this: Employee -------- EmployeeId EmployeeLastName StatusLookupId TypeLookupId Lookup ------ LookupId LookupGroup LookupCode LookupValue Assume the values for EmployeeStatus are: Active, OnLeave, Probation, Retired, Terminated (i.e. not a straight forward Active or Inactive) Assume the values for EmployeeType are: Intern, Co-op, Exempt, Non-Exempt See how things can get tricky quickly if we're not careful? Maybe the developer of the client would want Active and Probation employee records returned. Maybe they want all types except for Retired or Terminated? The latter is especially tricky if we later add a new status (e.g. Deceased). Dead employees would then be returned (not good). I'd be interested in the perspective of others. Thanks, Ron Ronald, in my own openion, the best way of having such program running well, is to normalize your database; i am not a database archetict, but based on my experience, when i face such problem, i play with the database structure, it know its not simple. let us think if your DB structure looks like : tblEmployee -------------- EmployeeId EmployeeLastName EmployeeStatusId EmployeTypeId tblEmployeeStatus ----------------- EmployeeStatusId EmployeeStatusDesc tblEmployeeType ----------------- EmployeeTypeId EmployeeTypeDesc with this, i think life will be much better. its only a brain storming , you can take it or leave it dude :) I hope i added a value here. Thanks Regards, Husam Al-A'araj www.aaraj.net > At first, it's easy to say (have a policy) that we'll hard-code for > statuscode='ACT' (or maybe instead statuscode <> 'INA') but I think that [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > Thanks, > Ron The database is currently normalized. Just because we group our status and type values into a Lookup table does not make it not normalized. We originally had a unique Status and Type table for most of our entities. Since the structures are identical, it is a lot of unneeded complexity when all can be grouped quite easily. > Ronald, > in my own openion, the best way of having such program running well, is to [quoted text clipped - 72 lines] >> Thanks, >> Ron Ronald, In this situation, it would seem like you want some sort of dynamic query generation. You would use the metadata about the tables/columns to generate your strings, based on filter criteria (you would have to generate some sort of general filter mechanism to capture this information). Then, with the filter information, and the metadata about the data structures, you can build your command and get your result set.  Signature- Nicholas Paldino [.NET/C# MVP] - mvp@spam.guard.caspershouse.com > At first, it's easy to say (have a policy) that we'll hard-code for > statuscode='ACT' (or maybe instead statuscode <> 'INA') but I think that [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > Thanks, > Ron Free MagazinesGet these publications absolutely FREE for up to 12 months. There are no hidden fees and no obligation. Simply choose a title, complete the application form and submit it. Read more ...
|
Reply to this Message
|
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.