× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.



Given the following situation:

We have a root file. The records in the root file can each own up to 99999 records in file A. The records in A can each own any number of records in file B, so long as there are no more than 99999 B records for any given root record. The records in B can own records in C, but again, no more than 99999 per root record, and so on to any level of nesting, but always with the constraint of no more than 99999 of a given level sub-record per root record.

Each A, B, C, . . . record is keyed to the root record, and to a 5-digit serial number within the root record; each B, C, . . . record is also keyed to its parent's serial number (in A, the "parent serial number" field is present, but always zero).

Now consider a new database design: each A, B, C, . . . record has a long serial number as its physical file key, a field pointing to its immediate parent's key, and a logical keyed to the parent and the serial number. In the case of A, the "immediate parent" is the root record's key. In the case of B, the "immediate parent" is the serial number of the A record that owns it. In the case of C, it's the serial number of the B record that owns it, and so forth as needed.

Within any given instance of this situation, the structure of the root file remains unchanged. Likewise, within any given instance, the structure of the meaningful data in A, B, C, . . . remains unchanged from the old design to the new, but the old key fields are replaced with new ones. But different instances may have different amounts of nesting (from never getting past the A level, to theoretically going as far as Z), and always differ in what the meaningful data is, and how it's structured.


Obviously, we can convert from the old design to the new design using native record level access, but this requires a complete new program to be written to accommodate every instance.

Is there a way to do the conversion using SQL, that would avoid having to write a different program for every instance?


As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Follow-Ups:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.