Simplifying a DB

Hello:

I was given a DB with 13 tables in it. These tables store info for a web site.
I need to simplify the DB and make it easy to transform into a MySQL RDBMS.
The current tables only have PKs and zero (0) FKs, which makes the table "un-relational" (am I right on this? please correct if I am wrong - I just don't see any relational lines when creating a Database Diagram from it.)
 
Is there anyway to make the DB more simple than what it is currently, being that there is no relation within the tables?

Thank you.
noamco36Asked:
Who is Participating?

[Product update] Infrastructure Analysis Tool is now available with Business Accounts.Learn More

x
I wear a lot of hats...

"The solutions and answers provided on Experts Exchange have been extremely helpful to me over the last few years. I wear a lot of hats - Developer, Database Administrator, Help Desk, etc., so I know a lot of things but not a lot about one thing. Experts Exchange gives me answers from people who do know a lot about one thing, in a easy to use platform." -Todd S.

micropc1Commented:
By more simple do you mean more normalized or more consolidated? Without seeing the database it would be impossible to say for sure, but the fact that there are no FKs in a database of that size would indicate to me that the database it not normalized to at least 2nd Normal Form. So yes, I would say the database structure could most definitely be improved, but I'm not sure if this is what you're asking...
0
Dave BaldwinFixer of ProblemsCommented:
I think the code that uses the tables is a more important issue.  13 simple tables is not a big deal but how are you going to access them?
0
noamco36Author Commented:
The way they are accessed is via a web site that fetches info like part numbers.
If I send the script of the DB will you be able to give more advice?
Where should I sent it to (FTP site or on this media)?
0
IT Pros Agree: AI and Machine Learning Key

We’d all like to think our company’s data is well protected, but when you ask IT professionals they admit the data probably is not as safe as it could be.

Dave BaldwinFixer of ProblemsCommented:
You don't need to send it to me, that won't help you any.  Has any code been written yet?  If so, what kind of language was used?  PHP?, ASP?  ASP.NET?  Is it something you know how to do?  If not, then you should consider hiring someone.
0
jogosCommented:
<<0 FK's>>
You mean no single column in a table that contains a value of a primary key of another table?  Yes then it's not relational.

Also possible that those columns exist but that there is not a FK-constraint in database that let database understand the link and guarantees the validity of the values. That lays all the consistency-checks of the values in the application.  Those relations are also used by tools to guide you in building a sql.
0
SJCFL-AdminCommented:
My advice is that unless you understand the use of the data, do not mess with the structure.  You could unintentionally make it worse.

Many DBA's do not feel it is necessary to implement RI provided by the database as it can be achieved by the application and they can save on the overhead.  The downside to this is that the relationships are not immediately obvious and are not enforced during database changes (or employee changes).  

I would be very surprised if your 13 tables do not have some form of application RI involved.  The safest way of detecting it would be to run a profiling tool to determine attributes sharing the same values.  They most likely would be the relationships you would want to investigate further.
0
Scott PletcherSenior DBACommented:
>> I need to simplify the DB <<

What do you mean by that?  Reduce the number of tables?

You'll hurt the design by doing that.  13 tables is probably too *few* already, not too many.  [I get 20+ tables with the most simple apps after reasonable normalization.]

>> The current tables only have PKs and zero (0) FKs, which makes the table "un-relational" <<

The tables are almost certainly still related to each other.  They're likely just not properly normalized and/or properly enforced.  A lot of people mistakenly think they can do the equivalent of FKs better than the db.  Aside from hiding the relationships in the code, and being very likely inconsistent, the overhead is more.

Institute the proper FKs in the db as you determine them, but do not get rid of tables without very careful consideration.
0

Experts Exchange Solution brought to you by

Your issues matter to us.

Facing a tech roadblock? Get the help and guidance you need from experienced professionals who care. Ask your question anytime, anywhere, with no hassle.

Start your 7-day free trial
It's more than this solution.Get answers and train to solve all your tech problems - anytime, anywhere.Try it for free Edge Out The Competitionfor your dream job with proven skills and certifications.Get started today Stand Outas the employee with proven skills.Start learning today for free Move Your Career Forwardwith certification training in the latest technologies.Start your trial today
Microsoft SQL Server

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.