Hi everyone, I just wanted to put up some discussion to see your view regarding this point in the project. So we do have this point here in the scenario. For each make of car, the daily rental tariff ($ 3) is recorded for each of the tariff types

So I assume we can infer a weak entity “make” like this

Since we already have a weak entity named “Make” then we should put that in our entity data dictionary. So we can at least show it like this.

So currently we have like this redundancy, I think we can swap out “make” in vehicle to use the “make_name from our make entity

So the relationship will somehow become like this

However, since we have already removed the make, won’t that mean in the atttribute dictionary vehicle will lose the “make” field (since we cannot put foreign key because we are still in conceptual stage)?

I wanted to know if some of you maybe have different opinion or different way to solve this.

Hi,

Good thinking!

I think you can have 2 options:

Option 1: Retain "Make" as an independent entity if you anticipate adding more attributes to it in the future. This approach allows for extensibility but might introduce some redundancy in the current model.

Option 2: Treat "make_name" as an attribute of the "Vehicle" entity if you foresee that "Make" will remain simple without additional details. This simplifies the schema but restricts the ability to expand "Make" related details in the future.

These options provide flexibility depending on your project's specific needs and anticipated developments.