1,016 views
5 votes
5 votes

The Second Normal Form states that it should meet all the rules for 1NF and there must be no partial dependences of any of the columns on the primary key , so i have doubt regarding this

if a prime attribute determines another prime attribute in a separate functional dependency then still is this 2nf or not?

I'm confuse little bit , please help me . thanks in advance

3 Answers

Best answer
3 votes
3 votes
Prime Attribute -> Prime Attribute  2NF qualifies for it, so no issues for 2NF as well as 3NF
Partial dependency is Prime Attribute -> Non Prime Attribute
selected by
2 votes
2 votes

All relational databases are in 1NF. (have atomic values)

Here, NP: Non-Prime and P: Prime

For 2NF

No partial dependency should be there. (We don't care about transitive dependency here)

P -> NP (Not P or NP -> P or NP -> NP ) is the only thing we have to check for.

P should be a proper subset of Candidate Key.

For 3 NF

No transitive dependency allowed (NP -> NP ) and must be in 2NF.
 

For BCNF

Suppose we have A -> B

A should be super key.

All FD should satisfy these conditions.
This is all you need to check for which normal from is satisfied.

edited by
0 votes
0 votes

if a prime attribute determines another prime attribut

It is a condition of BCNF, so the relation is in 2NF and 3NF also but not in BCNF

Related questions

3 votes
3 votes
2 answers
1
Parshu gate asked Nov 19, 2017
3,540 views
How is it option D??
1 votes
1 votes
0 answers
2
junaid ahmad asked Dec 1, 2017
228 views
Question asked to find minimum number of tables required.My question is how can we decide the table's unless cardinality ratio is given ?
2 votes
2 votes
2 answers
3
0 votes
0 votes
1 answer
4