Relationship help

[nozbilenler]

peşin Yardımlarınız için, size teşekkür ederim. fabrikalar ya da işletmeler, personel taşıma çalışma tablosu aşağıdaki gibidir

Ulaştırma Acantası

Müşteriler

Tedarikçiler

Hizmet araçları

Siparişler

Orders_suppliers

Senaryo:

ücretleri acantesinden're müşterilerden ücretleri olduğunu söyledi Nakliye ajansı alarak taşımak sonra Tedarikçi özel servis araçları ve müşterilerin işçilerinin günlük fiyatlar ay taşır. Benim ilişkileri nasıl? Diğer bir öneri bir fikir geldi? raporları sağ olsun.

Türkiye'den selamlar

Nuri

Agency.zip

[LaRetta]

selamlar, Nuri!!

İngilizce eğer yazabilirsiniz Bu yardımcı olacaktır. Ben diğerleri burada tercüme dener:

[color:gray]It would help if you can type in English. I will attempt to translate for others here:

peşin Yardımlarınız için, size teşekkür ederim. fabrikalar ya da işletmeler, personel taşıma çalışma tablosu aşağıdaki gibidir[color:gray]

in advance for your help, thank you. factories or businesses, staff transport operation table is as follows:

Ulaştırma Acantası ( [color:gray]transportation Acantasi)

Müşteriler ([color:gray]Customers)

Tedarikçiler ([color:gray]Suppiers)

Hizmet araçları ([color:gray]Service Vehicles)

Siparişler ([color:gray]Orders )

Orders_suppliers ([color:gray]Orders Suppliers)

ücretleri acantesinden're müşterilerden ücretleri olduğunu söyledi Nakliye ajansı alarak taşımak sonra Tedarikçi özel servis araçları ve müşterilerin işçilerinin günlük fiyatlar ay taşır. Benim ilişkileri nasıl? Diğer bir öneri bir fikir geldi? raporları sağ olsun.

[color:gray]acantesinden're fees from customers Shipping charges are said to move after the agency received a special service tools, suppliers and customers, workers move the daily prices months. How do my relationships? Another suggestion was an idea? cheers for the report.

Türkiye'den selamlar

[color:gray]Greetings from Turkey

[nozbilenler]

Selam laRetta...

Cevap verdiğin için çok Teşekkür ederim.Ben Türkçe yi İngilizceye çevirip gönderdiğim için pek birşeye benzemedi galiba onun için orijinal Türkçe yazmayı deneyeceğim.

Ben personellerin ofislere veya Fabrikalara taşınması ile ilğili bir veritabanı planlıyorum.

Örnek dosya da görüldüğü gibi tablolar şu şekilde

1-Taşıma Acantesi

2-Müşteriler

3-Tedarikçiler

4-Servis Araçları ( Otobüs,Midibüs )

5-Siparişler

6-Sipariş_Tedarikçiler

Senaryo şu şekilde

Tedarikçiler sabit bir ücret ve tablo daki

servis araçları ile Müşterilerin ofislerine ve Fabrikalarına Personellerini ve işçilerini taşıyor.Ücretlerini aylık olarak Taşıma acantesinden alıyor.Taşıma acantesi de Ücretini aylık olarak Müşterilerden alıyor.

Burada Tedarikçilerin hesapları tutuluyor.

ayrıca Müşterilerin hesapları tutuluyor.buna göre raporlar çıkıyor sizden burada öğrenmek istediğim benim Tablo lar arası ilişkiler doğrumu daha değişik öneri ve fikirleriniz varmı ben ingilizce bilmiyorum google teşekkür ederim onun sözlüğü ile tercüme edip sizi takip ediyorum.

Hepinize selam ederim.

Nuri

[LaRetta]

Translation from Google Translate:

Thank you very much for responding ederim.Ben Turkish translated into English and send good little something I like to think it's not going to try to write the original Turkish.

I moved to the staff of the office or factory, a database related to the plan.

Sample files, as shown in the table as follows

1-Carrying Acantesi

2-Customers

3-Suppliers

4-Service Vehicles (buses, midi)

5-Orders

6-Sipariş_Tedarikçiler

Scenario as follows:

Suppliers and a fixed fee in the table

Customers with service vehicles and personnel to the office and factory workers on a monthly basis taşıyor.Ücretlerini alıyor.Taşıma acantesi acantesinden de Transport Fee is taken from customers on a monthly basis.

Suppliers' accounts are kept here.

Also customers' accounts tutuluyor.buna reports by coming out you learn here that I want to my table s relations towards my people of different proposals and ideas Do my English I do not know google thank her words, translated whether to follow you I am.

Selam!

Ne söylüyor ama anlamıyorum okuyun. Senin dosya, ancak göz hala anlamıyorum. Ben yine yarın uyku sonra çalışacağız. Ben kişi burada bize yardımcı umuyoruz.

[color:gray]I read what you say but do not understand. I look at your file but still do not understand. I will try again tomorrow after sleeping. I hope other people here can assist us.

[nozbilenler]

Selam laRetta

1-The pur pose of the database scenarios ?

customers daily workplace transport

2-Who will carry ?

Suppliers_id

3-where with transport ?

Service_vehicle_id

4-Receive fees from suppliers ?

Transportaions_agency_id

5-Receive fees from transportaions_agency_id ?

Customers_id

6-Monthly fees will be

7-How the relationship demo file

8-Do you have other ideas and suggestions

Thank You

Nuri

[nozbilenler]

Link

[Søren Dyhr]

Provided the relational model shown above is correct, would it look like this (see attachment) in filemaker, when the aspect is each individual shipping order.

In filemaker do we not put valuelists in the graph (Which BTW isn't an ERD!!!), so everything in the ERD called REf_ is a field where I have prefixed it with vl_ ... here is it possible for several fields to subscribe to a common value list.

You will notice that the red (addresses) occurs 3 times in the graph, and it might very well be where you encounter problems with grasping what the graph is all about! It's a very common mistake newbe's make with the relational graph.

--sd

Shipping.pdf

[nozbilenler]

Hi leRetta

.to understand short, I will write a short

.Why was the database

.factories or businesses to carry workers

.Buses with the workers to move

.suppliers to carry

.suppliers and service vehicles will move

.charged by the number of services

.service price*Number of service=Amount

.Monthly fees will be calculated

.Agencies will be charged to the supplier

.for the services

.Customers will pay agencies

.costs between customers and acante ?

.Agency :Commission ? Reap a profit ?

.How will the entries

.How will the relationship

.How will reports

.relations in the following way

I will answer questions

be happy

Nuri

[nozbilenler]

Thank you

I will examine

[Søren Dyhr]

Right to address the problem you try to rise is where to put all records of expenses both those which happens once and the regular ones at salaries to workers.

Now this would take place in upper join table in the graph i made, but the snag to it that internal work processes in the shipping company also is a service provider to itself ... outside providers are no different. Each record in the join table is a single expense/charge originating internally or externally similar are money received from outside going to this table, covering the overall shipping service provided.

--sd

[nozbilenler]

hi soren

Review entries

service routes are

where to show

Transportagency.zip

[Søren Dyhr]

You have omitted from and to addresses TO's, from which the route must be established ... I could imagine doing this via a webobject say exploiting googlemaps or similar ... webscaping would then provide you with data for the expenses records in the if required ... I do know not enough to your business model to suggest something decisively. Saving this as records could be usefull, if the solution is runned without net access.

BTW have I here attached my initial template:

--sd

[nozbilenler]

hi soren

Okey ! will be input by hand, but where ?

route entries ==CompanyType_code

sample:

Customers ( Copenhagen kestrup )

Company_ID ( Jonh simit)= CompanyType_code ( Frederiksberg)

Suppliers in the category is loaded ?

Nuri

[Søren Dyhr]

It really depends on how many sets of data of these is tied to each of the shipping contracts ... if it's going to be a whole series would it require an extention to the graph with another TO ... however might it be somewhat simpler just to facilitate the shipping contract with required fields.

We need to get established what is the purpose of these registrations, are they likely to pop up in some sort of statistic view?

Remember I made a reservation cautioning that the suggested ERD I builded upon might have flaws or incompleteness I could be unaware of, since I haven't done the normalization of the structure? I might need to speak with someone who knows shipping discurses before making suggestions. But as such would it seem that it still just is a matter of facilitating the ShipmentOrder table with the required fields.

--sd