Storing actual values in a table, or the ID/key field?

[N1755L]

Is this a highly subjective thing, or is one method strongly encouraged over another?



I could swear I've seen many times in forums where it is suggested to store IDs instead of storing an actual "full" value in a field. At other times it seems as though I run into something similar to this:

https://www.accessforums.net/modules...tml#post222638

Is this a contradiction to what I thought as mentioned in the second sentence above, or are we talking about different circumstances where one should use the direct/full values, and other situations where one would store only the IDs (say, the foreign key) in a table?

I created a junction table that us fully populated with only IDs, and being new to Access, find this type of table somewhat difficult to deal with... storing the full/actual values would certainly make it much easier to later populate forms or reports, but if storing full values is not good DB design, then I don't want to get used to designing/programming this way.

Just wondering.

I certainly hope this is not one of those contentious issues like DAO vs. ADO where proponents from each side start a war over the discussion of the topic. If it is, please, everyone take a pill, else delete the question.

[alansidman]

In the thread you referenced, June was referring to lookup fields in Tables and not in forms. Foreign Keys are always more accurate than full descriptions. Look at this link on why you should not have lookups fields in Tables.

http://access.mvps.org/access/lookupfields.htm

[N1755L]

Ah... Ok... I didn't notice that they were referring to lookups in table fields. I have indeed seen it many a times over in forums the warning about not using lookups in table fields... when I design a table I don't even look at or consider the lookup tab. Don't remember why, just remember the taboo. I'll have to read over the link you posted to refresh my memory.

Thanks.