vb.net ean 128

vb.net ean 128

.net gs1 128

ean 128 .net

ean 128 barcode vb.net

ean 128 barcode vb.net,

ean 128 .net,

ean 128 barcode vb.net,
ean 128 barcode vb.net,
gs1-128 vb.net,
.net ean 128,
ean 128 .net,

gs1-128 .net,
.net gs1 128,
vb net gs1 128,
ean 128 .net,
ean 128 barcode vb.net,
.net gs1 128,
gs1-128 vb.net,
vb net gs1 128,
gs1-128 .net,
vb.net ean 128,
ean 128 .net,
ean 128 .net,
gs1-128 vb.net,

.net ean 128,
gs1-128 .net,
ean 128 barcode vb.net,
.net ean 128,
.net ean 128,
.net ean 128,
ean 128 vb.net,
gs1-128 .net,
gs1-128 vb.net,
ean 128 barcode vb.net,
ean 128 vb.net,
.net ean 128,
gs1-128 .net,
vb.net ean 128,
gs1-128 vb.net,
vb net gs1 128,
vb.net ean 128,
ean 128 .net,
ean 128 vb.net,
.net ean 128,
ean 128 vb.net,
vb net gs1 128,
gs1-128 .net,
gs1-128 vb.net,
ean 128 barcode vb.net,
vb.net ean 128,
vb.net ean 128,
vb net gs1 128,
ean 128 .net,
.net gs1 128,
ean 128 barcode vb.net,
.net gs1 128,
ean 128 vb.net,
gs1-128 .net,
vb.net ean 128,
.net gs1 128,
gs1-128 vb.net,
.net gs1 128,
vb net gs1 128,
.net gs1 128,
ean 128 barcode vb.net,
gs1-128 .net,
ean 128 barcode vb.net,
gs1-128 vb.net,
.net gs1 128,
gs1-128 .net,
gs1-128 .net,
ean 128 barcode vb.net,
vb net gs1 128,

In a bridged solution, the mechanics of the type 1 change are identical to those you have already learned. A simple update to the dimension row is all that is required. The new state of affairs is now reflected in the star, with no evidence that things ever looked any other way. After a type 1 change occurs, the bridge table can continue to be used to analyze facts by looking up or looking down from any member of the hierarchy. The same dimension rows are in place, although one has changed slightly. There is no impact on the bridge table itself, nor is there any impact on the various query techniques described earlier in this chapter.

The subquery version of the IN test checks whether a data value is equal to some value in a column of subquery results. SQL provides two quantified tests, ANY and ALL,that extend this notion to other comparison operators, such as greater than (>) and less than (<). Both of these tests compare a data value to the column of data values produced by a subquery, as shown in Figure 9-6.

If a hierarchy changes, rather than a member of the hierarchy, it is only necessary to adjust the bridge table. The dimension table is unaffected. The simplest method is to delete all rows in the bridge table relating to the changed ownership, and replace them with a new set of rows. It is also possible to update affected rows, if you prefer. Referring back to Figure 10-8, suppose that Company 6 is to be sold off, but Companies 7 and 8 will be retained. In the bridge table, all rows relating to the hierarchy involving Companies 1 through 8 will be removed and replaced with a set of new rows representing the new state of affairs. If the company that purchased Company 6 is also a customer, it will also have an ownership hierarchy reflected in the bridge table. This tree, too, will require replacement.

For example, a retail establishment might require only daily sales summaries to be transmitted to the corporate office If this is the case, then simply sending summary database information or even generating regular reports would be more useful If you re trying to use replication primarily for backup purposes,.

Strictly speaking, it is not necessary to wipe out the entire hierarchy tree. It is possible to handle the change as a series of deletes, updates, and inserts as required. Many of the relationships between the companies under Company 1 remain unaltered after the sale of Company 6. These rows do not need to be replaced. All the rows relating to Company 6 will require deletion. Other rows can be updated for example, after the sale, Company 8 is one level removed from Company 5 rather than two. This piecemeal approach is workable, but prone to error. It is very rare that changes to a hierarchy are treated as type 1. If the hierarchy is significant enough to demand the extra ETL work and query complexity of a hierarchy bridge table, it is relatively certain that changes to the hierarchy will be deemed significant, calling for a more complicated type 2 response.

8:

The ANY Test *

When a dimension table has an associated hierarchy bridge, a type 2 response to source changes involves more than the addition of a new row. Because the entity that has changed also participates in a hierarchy, the bridge will require some new rows as well. This much may be readily apparent. Unfortunately, the story does not end here. Remember that a standard type 2 response creates a version history of the changed dimension member. Queries can ignore this history by using the natural key. For example, a company undergoes a type 2 change when its headquarters moves. After the change, there will be two dimension rows for the company, each with the same natural key. One reflects the old location; the other reflects the new location. A report can ignore the fact that there are two versions of the company by using the natural key to group query results. To preserve this capability in the presence of a hierarchy bridge table, a type 2 change requires a ripple effect that impacts all other members of the hierarchy. They will also require type 2 responses, even though their source data has not changed. Before studying the reasons behind this complex response, the mechanics of the response itself will be presented. Once this is fully understood, the cause of this ripple effect will be fully explored and explained. You can skip the full explanation if you wish, but be sure you understand the mechanics of what must happen.