On Fri, 8 Aug 2014 10:07:27 -0700
Joel Madero <email@example.com> wrote:
Neater is exactly what I'm aiming for. Currently it's kind of all
over the place and with me continuously adding things I am always
debating where to put things, how to organize, how to easily view it,
etc.. etc... So neater is a big + for me.
Unwieldy is where I'm at with this thing, and it's only getting
It does indeed work and I'm pretty good with spreadsheets generally
but - well at my old job we had someone who had a 1.5 gig spreadsheet
(and it was absurd) and his logic was the same "it works" - I had a
hard time not saying "it works but it doesn't work RIGHT" - I'm
starting to feel like my spreadsheet doesn't work right (from
functionality to organization to me just being happy with it)
Well, sounds like changing to a database is the way to go, then :)
I will most definitely take you up on this. I guess my first step
would be a table that just has:
That sound right? I'm going to start after work today.
Well, you have a few choices:
a) you could have one table for books read and one for the books still
to read, and when you've read a book you have the database transfer the
record from the one table to the other.
b) you could have a table for all books, and a flag in the table to
show when it's read
c) you could have a table for all books, and another table with your
rating and such details that gets a record added when you've read the
Unfortunately, such choices are the ones we need to make when designing
the database, and it can sometimes be hard to know which is the best
Your current spreadsheet looks a little like scenario (a) with the two
worksheets, but it's not the best idea for the database, I feel.
Scenario (c) avoids having to have nulls in the table, but the data will
only ever be used joined to the first table, so it essentially comes
down to the same thing. I lean towards scenario (b) myself.
As such, the table would be called Books, and have the following fields:
BookID (or UniqueID, or just ID)
StoryOrCitations (perhaps this field should be split?)
CharacterOrDepth (perhaps this field should be split?)
The fields above the line should not allow nulls, the ones below the
line should. Thank a little about which fields you actually use, I
think some of them look like they are only partly used, maybe you
changed your mind on some of them.
Mostly the fields should be either an integer, or a varchar, with one
Adding books should be easy, if a book has not been read, everything
below the line will be a null, if the book has been read, everything
below the line should be not null, even if it is simply blank.
So the flag to tell if the book has been read would be if it has a date
that is not null.
That should be something to get started with.
P.S. I won't lose functionality that I have in spreadsheet when
using database right? Basically everything you can do in a
spreadsheet you can accomplish in a database?
Well, you shouldn't lose any functionality, databases can do everything
you can in a spreadsheet, and more, it's just a question of how hard it
is. Mostly what you seem to be using the spreadsheet for is pretty
straightfoward stuff, so you should be able to get all that done in a
database without too much hassle.
To unsubscribe e-mail to: firstname.lastname@example.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Impressum (Legal Info)
: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our trademark policy