individual / group clients

[tawatana]

Hi there,

I think this is a fairly simple database design query but have struggled with it over the past couple of versions of our database.

We are a charity organisation that deals with both individual and group clients (eg. Mary Smith, Humpybong Special School).

In the current client details database, i use a first name and a surname for individuals. With group clients the group name goes into the surname field.

The details are almost the same for both types of clients except the individuals have both home addresses and business addresses while the group clients only have business addresses.

I'm working on a new version of the system and have experimented with having a Individual Client database and a Group Client Database.

There are only a couple of database users with limited database/Filemaker knowledge and we probably only store about 2000 records so i don't want to get things too complicated for them.

In summarising, is it common practice to have one database to store individuals details and one database to store group details, or have a single database to store both individual/group details together.

Cheers

Brian

[LiveOak]

I would definitely keep them in the same file. If the file were to become large, it make more sense to move addresses to a separate file. FM is fastest with many records in files with few fields.

I'm currently rewriting a database for a not for profit institute which has what is basically contact information scattered in 5 files. If is a total &*^$#()# nightmare to generate a mailing list (excuse me, the pain is fresh) or search for a contact name. After the rewrite (very expensive), data import will also be very difficult.

Having said that, definitely use a separate Group Name field and have a Type field (Individual/Group). Don't put the group name in the surname field. This is kind of like naming each field "Misc." and letting people type data anywhere they wish. There always comes a case at a later time when you can figure out if some record is a individual missing a first name or an organization.

-bd

[CaelC]

I agree with LiveOak and would add that whe you have a separate field for group name, if you want to, you can always calculate a field that tests to see which fields are empty and only disply the one that is filled out.

In simple english: if group name is blank, then display firstname and surname, otherwise display group name.

Something like that on layouts for generating labels, letters, view only etc. will keep things nice and clean.

Also, in a small database such as yours one file is best for this sort of thing. When you get into very large systems with many, many possible contacts for a single organization or lots and lots of possible phone numbers, types, etc. it is often best to "normalize" the database in several different files. An example of this is shipping address information, where there can be zero, 1 or many, many shipping addresses for one primary contact, that is best normalized to a separate database. If it's designed properly it can scale nicely and offer far fewer problems than a single file solution.

That's probably more than you wanted to know, but thought I should clarify that sometimes it is good to have multiple files with contact information and sometimes it is not.

Cael.