Polymorphic Associations in SQL





.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ height:90px;width:728px;box-sizing:border-box;
}







0















I'm creating a project with big database of Movies and Series, both in seperate tables. Now I have other tables like Country for specifying production country of movie or/and serie. If I want to do this in many to many relation it requires connection table one for movie and one for serie. It would look like this:
DB with separate connection tables.



It is many tables, so I was searching for other solutions and I found this article and the "Using one data entity per class" method seems to be best for me. I implemented it like that: DB with combined connection table.



The second implementation seems to be good, but there's a one problem I'm facing and that's a complicated inserts. To insert new Movie, I need first to add new Production and second to insert Movie and pick just created Production ID.



My question is could it be fixed in some way ? Can't it be auto incremented from Movie table ?



I'm using 10.1.36-MariaDB and I'm realy sorry for my poor english :c










share|improve this question





























    0















    I'm creating a project with big database of Movies and Series, both in seperate tables. Now I have other tables like Country for specifying production country of movie or/and serie. If I want to do this in many to many relation it requires connection table one for movie and one for serie. It would look like this:
    DB with separate connection tables.



    It is many tables, so I was searching for other solutions and I found this article and the "Using one data entity per class" method seems to be best for me. I implemented it like that: DB with combined connection table.



    The second implementation seems to be good, but there's a one problem I'm facing and that's a complicated inserts. To insert new Movie, I need first to add new Production and second to insert Movie and pick just created Production ID.



    My question is could it be fixed in some way ? Can't it be auto incremented from Movie table ?



    I'm using 10.1.36-MariaDB and I'm realy sorry for my poor english :c










    share|improve this question

























      0












      0








      0








      I'm creating a project with big database of Movies and Series, both in seperate tables. Now I have other tables like Country for specifying production country of movie or/and serie. If I want to do this in many to many relation it requires connection table one for movie and one for serie. It would look like this:
      DB with separate connection tables.



      It is many tables, so I was searching for other solutions and I found this article and the "Using one data entity per class" method seems to be best for me. I implemented it like that: DB with combined connection table.



      The second implementation seems to be good, but there's a one problem I'm facing and that's a complicated inserts. To insert new Movie, I need first to add new Production and second to insert Movie and pick just created Production ID.



      My question is could it be fixed in some way ? Can't it be auto incremented from Movie table ?



      I'm using 10.1.36-MariaDB and I'm realy sorry for my poor english :c










      share|improve this question














      I'm creating a project with big database of Movies and Series, both in seperate tables. Now I have other tables like Country for specifying production country of movie or/and serie. If I want to do this in many to many relation it requires connection table one for movie and one for serie. It would look like this:
      DB with separate connection tables.



      It is many tables, so I was searching for other solutions and I found this article and the "Using one data entity per class" method seems to be best for me. I implemented it like that: DB with combined connection table.



      The second implementation seems to be good, but there's a one problem I'm facing and that's a complicated inserts. To insert new Movie, I need first to add new Production and second to insert Movie and pick just created Production ID.



      My question is could it be fixed in some way ? Can't it be auto incremented from Movie table ?



      I'm using 10.1.36-MariaDB and I'm realy sorry for my poor english :c







      sql polymorphism mariadb associations






      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question











      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question










      asked Nov 26 '18 at 17:35









      SzwajowySzwajowy

      53




      53
























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          0














          Since Movies and Series have only one column that is different (boxoffice), it makes sense to put the two tables together and let boxoffice be NULL for series. I don't understand the need for Production, but it seems to add as much complexity as it saves. Try to get rid of it.



          I suggest that the id for Country be the standard 2-letter codes. This will be more compact and eliminate some stuff.



          The is no good reason to have an id for a connection table. See many-to-many tips . Those tips will speed up many of your queries, and save space.



          "Polymorphic" and many other neat-things-in-a-textbook don't necessarily work well in Relational Databases.






          share|improve this answer


























          • That's great answer. Thank you for your help :)

            – Szwajowy
            Nov 29 '18 at 19:39












          Your Answer






          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
          StackExchange.snippets.init();
          });
          });
          }, "code-snippets");

          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "1"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53486295%2fpolymorphic-associations-in-sql%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          0














          Since Movies and Series have only one column that is different (boxoffice), it makes sense to put the two tables together and let boxoffice be NULL for series. I don't understand the need for Production, but it seems to add as much complexity as it saves. Try to get rid of it.



          I suggest that the id for Country be the standard 2-letter codes. This will be more compact and eliminate some stuff.



          The is no good reason to have an id for a connection table. See many-to-many tips . Those tips will speed up many of your queries, and save space.



          "Polymorphic" and many other neat-things-in-a-textbook don't necessarily work well in Relational Databases.






          share|improve this answer


























          • That's great answer. Thank you for your help :)

            – Szwajowy
            Nov 29 '18 at 19:39
















          0














          Since Movies and Series have only one column that is different (boxoffice), it makes sense to put the two tables together and let boxoffice be NULL for series. I don't understand the need for Production, but it seems to add as much complexity as it saves. Try to get rid of it.



          I suggest that the id for Country be the standard 2-letter codes. This will be more compact and eliminate some stuff.



          The is no good reason to have an id for a connection table. See many-to-many tips . Those tips will speed up many of your queries, and save space.



          "Polymorphic" and many other neat-things-in-a-textbook don't necessarily work well in Relational Databases.






          share|improve this answer


























          • That's great answer. Thank you for your help :)

            – Szwajowy
            Nov 29 '18 at 19:39














          0












          0








          0







          Since Movies and Series have only one column that is different (boxoffice), it makes sense to put the two tables together and let boxoffice be NULL for series. I don't understand the need for Production, but it seems to add as much complexity as it saves. Try to get rid of it.



          I suggest that the id for Country be the standard 2-letter codes. This will be more compact and eliminate some stuff.



          The is no good reason to have an id for a connection table. See many-to-many tips . Those tips will speed up many of your queries, and save space.



          "Polymorphic" and many other neat-things-in-a-textbook don't necessarily work well in Relational Databases.






          share|improve this answer















          Since Movies and Series have only one column that is different (boxoffice), it makes sense to put the two tables together and let boxoffice be NULL for series. I don't understand the need for Production, but it seems to add as much complexity as it saves. Try to get rid of it.



          I suggest that the id for Country be the standard 2-letter codes. This will be more compact and eliminate some stuff.



          The is no good reason to have an id for a connection table. See many-to-many tips . Those tips will speed up many of your queries, and save space.



          "Polymorphic" and many other neat-things-in-a-textbook don't necessarily work well in Relational Databases.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited Nov 29 '18 at 20:47

























          answered Nov 27 '18 at 2:06









          Rick JamesRick James

          70.7k566106




          70.7k566106













          • That's great answer. Thank you for your help :)

            – Szwajowy
            Nov 29 '18 at 19:39



















          • That's great answer. Thank you for your help :)

            – Szwajowy
            Nov 29 '18 at 19:39

















          That's great answer. Thank you for your help :)

          – Szwajowy
          Nov 29 '18 at 19:39





          That's great answer. Thank you for your help :)

          – Szwajowy
          Nov 29 '18 at 19:39




















          draft saved

          draft discarded




















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53486295%2fpolymorphic-associations-in-sql%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          Wiesbaden

          Marschland

          Dieringhausen