getting into access, can you point me in the right direction?

[golem]

Hello everyone.

I'm starting to use access instead of excel to store data because it's
just more functional. I've built a simple db with two tables, a
relationship from one to many, and it works, i can report from it and
add things as i need to. It's just not as functional as i want it to
be.

What i am trying to capture is the skill level, assessments, and
trainings of employees in a db for my boss.

I'd like to be able to build out reports that can show how much of
each typing has been done (typing and windows training are offered
right now), or just how much of either type.

I'd like to be able to report on the current and possibly past
assessments of staff.

I was thinking of an employee table, a separate training table for
each type of training, and a separate table for each type of
assessment. Also a plan table to discuss my strategy eith each
employee.That makes six tables.

First of all, am i going about this in the right way? This will be
only the second db i've built, and i know i've got a lot to learn. My
boss really wants accountability so i want to give her every way to
tweak and pick apart this data.

Any tips or tweaks will be greatly helpful. I'm sick of excel and my
first db was complimented by my boss, so i want to keep it up. Thanks
again for any help!

bill

 

[John W. Vinson]

Hello everyone.

I'm starting to use access instead of excel to store data because it's
just more functional. I've built a simple db with two tables, a
relationship from one to many, and it works, i can report from it and
add things as i need to. It's just not as functional as i want it to
be.

What i am trying to capture is the skill level, assessments, and
trainings of employees in a db for my boss.
I'd like to be able to build out reports that can show how much of
each typing has been done (typing and windows training are offered
right now), or just how much of either type.

I'd like to be able to report on the current and possibly past
assessments of staff.

I was thinking of an employee table, a separate training table for
each type of training, and a separate table for each type of
assessment. Also a plan table to discuss my strategy eith each
employee.That makes six tables.

WRONG. Storing data in Table Names is *not* the way to go.

Instead recognize that you have a "many to many" relationship. Each Employee
gets many types of Training; each type of Training is received by many
Employees. This is a universal type of problem in relational databases, and
it's always handled the same way: *a new table*.

You have three different kinds of "entities" - real life persons, things, or
events - to manage. Employees; Courses (e.g. "typing", "Windows", "Database
Normalization"); and Trainings Received. I'd suggest:

Employees
EmployeeID <Primary Key>
LastName
FirstName
Department
<other biographical data>

Courses
CourseID <Primary Key>
CourseName
<other info about the course itself, e.g. prerequisites, description,
trainer name, ...?>

Trainings
EmployeeID <link to Employees, who's getting trained>
CourseID <what the employee was trained on>
TrainingDate Date/Time <when>
SatisfactoryCompletion <yes/no>
Comments
<any other info about this particular training session>

You'll also undoubtedly need other tables (I like your strategy planning idea,
which may involve two or more tables as well!) as you go along.

And congratulations on moving from Excel into Access for this application:
it's really a much more appropriate tool.

John W. Vinson [MVP]

 

[Aaron Kempf]

yeah don't worry about MS Access

learn SQL Server if you want a job

 

[Klatuu]

Absolute nonsense.

 

[Aaron Kempf]

stfu kid

Access MDB is obsolete; and it has been for 10 years

anyone using MDB.. and I quote-- should be FIRED and then SPIT UPON

lose the training wheels, munchkin-- maybe you wouldn't be stuck making
$12/hour if you weren't a cry baby MDB _LOSER_

 

[Aaron Kempf]

Access is a great FRONTEND

but for a database engine?
I'd rather use PEN AND PAPER than MDB

I mean UNRELIABLE
I mean UNSCALABLE
I mean UNPREDICTABLE
I mean DEPECRATED

Jet and DAO haven't been included with office, windows or MDAC for 10 years

STFU and lose the training wheels, kid

 

[Klatuu]

Your ignorance is exceeded only by your offensive attitude.
I have no need for training wheels, but you really need to get some
knowledge and perspective.

There is no end all be all for any software application platform. For small
to medium size environments where the company or department is on a tight
budget, Access is a perfectly acceptable tool. For a small office with a few
users, installing SQL Server would be using a semi to carry your lunch to
work.

For larger systems, using SQL Server as the data source is a good way to
scale the system up; however, this presupposes the organization can afford a
knowledgeable SQL Server DBA and the additional hardware resources required.

Your statement regarding what is or is not included with Office has no
meaning. For any version of Office that includes Access, Jet and DAO are
both included. And, in case you are not aware (obviously you are not), DAO is
the native method for 2003.

If you have anything positive to contribute to this newgroup, please do;
otherwise, shut up and go away.

Oh, did I mention you are an offensive and annoying idiot?

 

[Renee]

Thank you, Klatuu.

Your ignorance is exceeded only by your offensive attitude.
I have no need for training wheels, but you really need to get some
knowledge and perspective.

There is no end all be all for any software application platform. For small
to medium size environments where the company or department is on a tight
budget, Access is a perfectly acceptable tool. For a small office with a few
users, installing SQL Server would be using a semi to carry your lunch to
work.

For larger systems, using SQL Server as the data source is a good way to
scale the system up; however, this presupposes the organization can afford a
knowledgeable SQL Server DBA and the additional hardware resources required.

Your statement regarding what is or is not included with Office has no
meaning. For any version of Office that includes Access, Jet and DAO are
both included. And, in case you are not aware (obviously you are not), DAO is
the native method for 2003.

If you have anything positive to contribute to this newgroup, please do;
otherwise, shut up and go away.

Oh, did I mention you are an offensive and annoying idiot?