Search results for query: *

Thats because each shift is equally weighted ... ie NOT weighted. Perhaps ignoring the context of the problem is essential here... at it's core the problem is to reduce and M:N relation ship to a 1:1 relationship with a single query... One would think this is a common database problem, but I...

n factorial m is a worst case scenario where every user could work every shift on every day, in our scenario this is far from true. -Every user certainly cannot work every shift -Every user cannot work on every day Each user is assigned a shift from their collection, each shift is weighted...

Hm, well first off it would probably most beneficial to explain what our data represents. This table describes the relationship between a business' staff and the collection of shifts that must be worked in any given week. The reason that the table is an M:N relationship is a result of the fact...

Nice observation rac...I owe you an apology... the source table in question is not actually N:N, M:N more aptly describes the relationship between users and shifts. At the tail end of your post you explained that since it is an M:N relationship I won't be able to reduce it to a 1:1...

Just a quick question regarding a problem I'm having with a query... In it's shortest summary the problem is simply to narrow down a table that describes an N:N relationship to a 1:1 relation ship... If the table in question looks like this : ------------------------ ID | userID | shiftID |...