Exam PL-600 topic 2 question 6 discussion

Does N-N with system generated table means Native Many to many relation and with custom table means intersect table? If so the I would choose: 1. Many to Many with system generated (Nothing in question stated that any additional infor about qualification needed) 2. One to many (Educator can teach multiple courses) 3. Many to Many with custom table (session is a good example of intersect table)

1. N:N (system generated table) as qualification will be master data and multiple educators can have multiple qualifications. 2. 1:N as each course can have only 1 primary educator (lookup field) 3. 1:N as each course needs to have sessions information associated with the course for tracking purpose. It shouldn't be N:N as it is clearly mentioned that session info is maintained in excel when a session is held for a course implying each course can have multiple sessions exclusive to that course only -> "Each time a course is offered, the company tracks that the session has taken place in an Excel workbook."

Educators must be associated with their qualifications. Many-to-many relationship that uses a custom table. An educator can have multiple qualifications, and each qualification can belong to multiple educators. This relationship requires a custom table to track the connections between educators and qualifications. When a course is held, there must be a primary educator assigned. One-to-many relationship. Each course can have one primary educator assigned, but an educator can be the primary educator for multiple courses. This is a one-to-many relationship between courses and educators. When a course is held, the company needs to collect information on that session. One-to-many relationship. Each course session is unique, and the company needs to track information about each session. Since multiple course sessions can exist, the relationship between courses and session information is one-to-many.

For whoever says first is 1:N: a qualification can be held by multiple professors, and a professor can have more than a qualification, so you need N: N

This one is a bit out there in possibilities. 1. This is for sure a Many to Many and I would have said System Generated Table, because it is the hidden intersect table.. The reason behind M:M is because you have a table that has educators. You would most certainly have a table, without duplicates, of qualifications. Since the qualifications table is essentially a "list" of unique options, that means Multiple Educators could be associated to the same qualification and a qualification could be associated to multiple educators. Hence M:M/N:N 2. 1:N because an instance of a course will never pant to M educators 3. 1:N because again, you have a Course, the course has N number of pieces of information associated and in this case it would be a Custom table because you need extra details "collected" as its not simply an association but an association + extra data.

What means "custom table" and "system generated table"?

1st Box: Many-to-Many that uses a system generated table. 2nd Box: One-to-many relationship 3rd Box: Many-to-many relationship that uses a custom table.

Honestly you can take your pick with the wording of these questions. For e.g question 2 'When each course is held there must be a primary educator assigned' you could read that as only one educator so 1 to many, or if there is a 'primary' there must be secondary educators too, so a one to many with custom table and record the relationship of primary or secondary in the intersect. I'm guessing the first one, but its a total guess on what they mean, not on how relationships work!

Answer for #1 should be N-N with custom table because the type of qualification should be a consideration in the design. Otherwise, the list available to select from will be a mess.

1. I would give N:N with system generated table as an answer here. But personally I would prefer N:N with custom table for implementation considering ease of query 2. One to many with primary educator lookup 3. N:N with Custom Table. Course - Course Session

1st Box: Many-to-Many that uses a system generated table. "The company maintains a list of required qualifications ". A qualification can be associated to many Educators. An Educator can be associated to many qualifications. This is many to many. As there are no other details that need to be captured about the association (e.g. Date of qualification attained), then a system generated intersect table is sufficient. 2nd Box: One-to-many relationship "Primary educator" indicates a single value selected. Therefore, one-to-many. 3rd Box: One-to-many relationship A course can have zero or more course sessions. This is one-to-many. NOTE: Many-to-many makes no sense to me. If I'm on the course session record, from which table would I be selecting multiple records to associate to? Courses? No. Educators? No. Qualifications? No

1. N:N with system table assuming you want to track if 2 euducators have the same qualification. 2. One to many (one Educator per course but multiple courses per educator) 3. One to many (one course, multiple information? this case seriously lacks info)

In my opinion this should be the right answer: 1- Many-To-Many(Each Educator can have multiple Qualifications and Each Qualification have belong to multiple Educators. ) 2-1-Many(On the course we'll have a look up to Primary Educator represent the Many part) 3-1-Many (Each course can have multiple session)

1 - Many to Many (system generated educator - qualifications) 2- One to Many (primary educator) 3- One to Many (course session)

N:N Custom table - Qualifications can be the same for many Educators 1:N a Primary Educator for each course 1:N a course has many sessions

I’m sorry but there is no system table that can be used for the first question.

This question was there on 20/Feb/2022.