J
Janis
I have a really simple structure for an ISP. I just need to get weekly
utilization figures. The problem is in when the node is over utilized it
gets segmented and the field divides. I don't know if my relationships are
right.
area-->router-->transmistter-->nodeID-->statistics
areaID
area
transmitterID
AREAID
transmitter ports
nodeID
transmitterId
nodes
statisticsID
weekending
internet traffic
t.v. traffic
A tricky part is they split the node if the utilization is over 50% and
move it to a new router. The nodes have 4 letter names. For example
ABCD,EFGH. The related transmitters sometimes have the exact same name
ABCD,EFGH. They take one node, for example, ABCD and call it A, ABCD-A and
ABCD-B to show the split on the transmitter. They take the first node ABCD
corresponds to transmitter ABCD-A and the 2nd EFGH and it corresponds to
transmitter ABCD-B to split it if the utilization is over 50%. Sometimes
there are more nodes than transmitter ports.
The nodes and transmitters are still unique but I have to show the history.
This part will be done by data input.
There could be more than one node on one transmitter. The node is the end
of the cable that feeds the subscribers.
When it gets segmented one of the groups of letters gets moved to a
different router.
QUESTION:Is this a relationship or not? Since the field contents for the
nodes will change should I show each separate node as a separate field?
instead of all the nodes on a transmitter as a group? That way I am dealing
with individual nodes instead of a group? This also might be a many to many.
Matching them on this smaller level might be a lot more trouble than it is
worth for just getting out weekly statistics.
So instead of one to one, relaitonship from one transmitter to a group of
nodes it would be individual relationships from the transmitter to each node?
Then when you split the transmitter you can do the relationships better. In
some cases the transmitter and ports are the same groups of letters. In some
cases there are more nodes.
utilization figures. The problem is in when the node is over utilized it
gets segmented and the field divides. I don't know if my relationships are
right.
area-->router-->transmistter-->nodeID-->statistics
areaID
area
transmitterID
AREAID
transmitter ports
nodeID
transmitterId
nodes
statisticsID
weekending
internet traffic
t.v. traffic
A tricky part is they split the node if the utilization is over 50% and
move it to a new router. The nodes have 4 letter names. For example
ABCD,EFGH. The related transmitters sometimes have the exact same name
ABCD,EFGH. They take one node, for example, ABCD and call it A, ABCD-A and
ABCD-B to show the split on the transmitter. They take the first node ABCD
corresponds to transmitter ABCD-A and the 2nd EFGH and it corresponds to
transmitter ABCD-B to split it if the utilization is over 50%. Sometimes
there are more nodes than transmitter ports.
The nodes and transmitters are still unique but I have to show the history.
This part will be done by data input.
There could be more than one node on one transmitter. The node is the end
of the cable that feeds the subscribers.
When it gets segmented one of the groups of letters gets moved to a
different router.
QUESTION:Is this a relationship or not? Since the field contents for the
nodes will change should I show each separate node as a separate field?
instead of all the nodes on a transmitter as a group? That way I am dealing
with individual nodes instead of a group? This also might be a many to many.
Matching them on this smaller level might be a lot more trouble than it is
worth for just getting out weekly statistics.
So instead of one to one, relaitonship from one transmitter to a group of
nodes it would be individual relationships from the transmitter to each node?
Then when you split the transmitter you can do the relationships better. In
some cases the transmitter and ports are the same groups of letters. In some
cases there are more nodes.