David, > Gah. That's what I was hoping to avoid. It's like writing BASIC and > having to leave yourself room... Yes, but unlike a basic program of 10000 lines (heh, remember that!) you only need to leave room for n questions. If n is small - no problem, even if you have to 'renumber'. If n is large then the original idea of 'order in a field' wouldn't be much easier - imagine a 4000 character field for 1000 questions. You imply n may be as small as 10. If so, you really haven't got a problem. In practice on large datasets we use an update query to reorder things. Sometimes the reordering is so complex we have to temporarily add another field, but it's no big deal. And if you're _very_ paranoid (aren't we all), you could always count in millions and still have room for 2000 questions, unless you're running on a 16 bit machine... :-)
> OK. We were actually looking at putting ORDER as a field in SURVEY (as > renamed), and similarly for the options. Is there any particular reason > to do it as a separate table rather than as part of the questions table > itself? You are right - you only need a seperate table if questions are used more than once. As they are not you can put the question order field in the question table. Best regard, Andy. -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
