Hi!

It this possible?

I have to a "User" table and a "Group" table and a many-to-many resolver table "UserXGroup"

User Table
---------------
IDUser (PK)
FirstName
LastName
Login

Group Table
----------------
IDGroup (PK)
Name

UserXGroup Table
------------------------
IDUser   (PK + FK to the User Table)
IDGroup (PK + FK to the Group Table)

This works no problem. What I want to do is to combine the User and Group table into one table

UserGroup Table
---------------
IDUserGroup (PK)
FirstName (Used for User First Name and Group Name)
LastName (Null for a Group)
Login (Null for a Group)
UserGroupType ('U' for User and 'G' for Group)

UserXGroup Table
------------------------
IDUser   (PK + FK to the UserGroup Table)
IDGroup (PK + FK to the UserGroup Table)

Will ES recognize this 'UserXGroup' table as a many-to-many resolver table?

Thanks

Sarosh

EntitySpaces will work with a self-referencing many-to-many, but it does not generate the direct many-to-many hierarchical property to the self-referencing collection, nor will it generate the Associate/Dissociate methods. It only generates the two zero-to-many properties into the associative table. So, no, 'UserXGroup' will not be recognized as a many-to-many resolver (associative) table.

BTW, the current design sounds like a more properly normalized database than your proposed change. The fact that User and Group do not have the same fields, 'LastName' has to serve a dual purpose, two fields are un-used for Group, and the 'UserGroupType' field could make queries and saves more difficult, leads me to believe that the current design is "correct". And, you get the benefit of EntitySpaces many-to-many hierarchical properties.

Most guides recommend taking your database to at least 3rd normal form, unless there are good, practical reasons to de-normalize (meaning it solves more problems than it creates).

http://www.datamodel.org/NormalizationRules.html

Hi!

In the new model the Users and Groups are both stored in the same UserGroup Table and the PK is IDUserGroup and the UserGroupType (Flag) column determines if a row is of type "U" - User or "G" - Group so that's why both the UserXGroup table's (many-many resolver) columns point to  the UserGroup table one points to a User row (UserGroupType = "U") and the other points to a Group row (UserGroupType = "G")

 But I agree with David that I should stick with my current design and not complicate this.

Are there any plans to allow tables to be marked (in case they have some extra columns or some uniqure structure) as many-to-many resolver (associative) tables so that mygenerations can create a class with Associate/Dissociate methods?

Thanks

Sarosh