I'm using StarUML in order to do a ER diagram and I can create relation with two entities like this:
and in StarUML:
But I cannot create a relation with 3 entity like this:
Have you some ideas to do it in StarUML?
It looks like the StarUML supports only the physical ER diagram symbols and you need to represent your database structure using a physical ER translation.
you can also find some reference here
https://www.lucidchart.com/pages/ER-diagram-symbols-and-meaning
Related
I'm designing an ER diagram for a social network and recently I got involved in an argument with my colleagues whether this part is right or wrong
ER DIAGRAM PROBLEM
Where Faqet(Pages) is connected with Shfrytezuesi(User) using three actions, pelqen is for storing likes, krijon faqe to know who created the page, and udheheq to store all page admins, so my question is
is this design wrong?
Can two tables be linked with more than one action, this is where I'm not certain
It's perfectly valid to have any number of relationships between any number of entity sets. My only concern with the diagram is that multiple role lines below Shfrytezuesi are merged into one - I recommend keeping them distinct.
Note that in the entity-relationship model, we don't link tables. That idea comes from the old network data model, in which rows represented entities, tables represented entity sets, and links between rows/tables represented relationships.
One disadvantage with that model is that it supports only directed binary relationships - many-to-many binary, ternary and higher relationships and relationships with attributes all required associative entities to be introduced. However, three binary relationships aren't equivalent to a ternary relationship, and not all relationships can be represented in binary data models.
The ER model supports n-ary relationships and attributes on relationships. Entity sets are represented by their primary keys and relationships by combinations of entity keys. Entity sets plus attributes form entity relations, relationship sets plus attributes form entity relations. These relations get mapped to tables. In practice, tables with the same primary keys get combined to reduce the number of tables, which means one-to-one and one-to-many relationships get combined into the relations for one of their associated entity sets.
Regardless of how tables are combined, attributes and relationships are represented by sets of columns. For example, based on your diagram, Pelqen would be represented as (FID PK, SID) (assuming SID is the primary key of Shfrytezuesi). These columns might have different names, e.g. SID might be renamed to AdminSID, especially if the relationship was combined into Faqet. The old network data model would view FID FK -> FID PK as a relationship, which as described above and below is a very limited kind of relationship and not the approach taken by the ER model.
Another disadvantage of the network data model is predetermined access paths, which means we have to navigate from table to table using the predefined relationships. This complicated queries and data processing significantly. This limitation was one of the main drivers for the development of the relational model, to which the ER model maps. The understanding of tables as relations in the RM enables us to construct and navigate arbitrary access paths using joins. So, we do link tables in the RM, but at query time and as needed rather than at design time. The ER model is used for conceptual design only and doesn't describe relationships between tables, only relationships between entity sets.
Now, the ER model isn't a complete and consistent logical model like the RM, but it is a significant improvement over the network data model. An even more rigorous approach than ER would be object-role modeling, but that's a different topic.
I came to know that there is Crow's foot ER diagram notation, and got a good quick reference. Have a look at the below diagram:
I did get some clarity on these symbols, however I have difficulty in understanding:
1) Why we have the "connector symbols" on both side of the line?
2) How to interpret them?
Can anyone please help me understand this?
Your reference is somewhat incorrect. The Entity-Relationship model doesn't use Crow's foot. Chen's notation and extensions to that notation can be called ER diagrams.
Your diagram is a generalization of table diagrams, modified to allow many-to-many associations and hide attributes. However, it doesn't represent relationships using their own shapes, and I see no indication of support for ternary or higher relationships. There's also no indication of other ER concepts like weak entities, associative entities, identifying relationships or keys.
Data models that only support binary relationships are usually based on the network data model, not on the Entity-Relationship model. Relationships in the ER model, when physically implemented, are represented by two or more entity columns in the same table, not by any kind of link between tables. In actual table diagrams, many-to-many relationships are represented by their own table, with two one-to-many association lines. In those cases, the cardinality indicators represent the number and optionality of records with matching values for matching PK/FK columns.
The interpretation of the Crow's foot symbols are indicated in the orange column. For more information about modeling with Crow's foot, see Entity Modelling. However, don't confuse this with the Entity-Relationship model as described by Chen, or either of them with the Relational model.
I am an ICS student and I have been given two questions.
1.) List all the Functional Dependencies that hold for the database.
2.) For each relation in your relational schema write down whether the relation is in BCNF or 3NF and if not give a violating FD.
I'm just having problems understanding the relationship between functional dependencies and the ER Diagram. I've watched a few videos online but I'm still getting stuck on how to answer the two above questions and would appreciate some help in finding the right direction.
Below is an ER diagram and I was hoping someone could give some examples on how to start from here.
For each entity set (e.g. Department), each attribute is an FD (e.g. Department Name -> Location).
For each relationship set (e.g. Offers), there's an FD from the combination of keys of "many" entities to each of the keys of "one" entities (e.g. Course_ID -> Department Name)
all the attributes include in ER diagram or not?
My database have 8 tables and nearly 50 attributes, i include these 50 attributes in a single diagram OR not?
First thing - ER diagram is something that is first created usually and then later on converted into a data model like relational. So the data storing requirements are modeled into an ER diagram first and later on are converted into tables. There is rarely a case where you have to reverse engineer an existing data model into the ER diagram level (Conceptual Level).
During this process, tables are created for enitities and relationships accordingly (using some algorithmic process).
And a good way of practice is to draw the ER diagram with only entities and relationships without the attributes as it makes it very clumsy and difficult to concentrate on the actual entities and the relationships between them. Later on in a separate document or a page, you can list all the attributes corresponding to entities individually.
Hope this gives you a basic idea.
Using Chen's notation on an entity relationship model, for database design. Is this the correct way to illustrate the following relation. 'Many employees report to one employee':
I think the below image would be more approapraiate
E-R Diagrams
DATA MODEL
STACK SIMILAR QUESTION
You dont need the diamond. You can have the direct relationship. Unless the relationship itself has attributes, the diamond is not used.