The operation manager at a construction company uses a custom object called Machinery to manage the usage and maintenance of its cranes and other machinery. The manager wants to be able to assign machinery to different constructions jobs, and track the dates and costs associated with each job. More than one piece of machinery can be assigned to one construction job.
What should a developer do to meet these requirements?
To manage the usage and maintenance of cranes and other machinery, tracking the dates and costs associated with each job, the best solution is to create a junction object with a Master-Detail Relationship to both the Machinery object and the Construction Job object. This setup properly addresses the requirement of supporting many-to-many relationships, as more than one piece of machinery can be assigned to one construction job, and each piece of machinery can be assigned to different jobs.
answer should be c
One construction job can have many machineries ("More than one piece of machinery can be assigned to one construction job"). One Machinery can be assigned to many jobs ("The manager wants to be able to assign machinery to different constructions jobs") I think this can be achieved only with junction
answer is c
many to many relationship
argument 1: The manager wants to be able to assign machinery to different constructions jobs, and track the dates and costs associated with each job. m1<--J1(denting),J2(painting),J3(finishing) argument 2: More than one piece of machinery can be assigned to one construction job. m1,m2,m3-->J1(denting) can only be achieved through Junction object(Many to Many).Answer - C
many to many relationship - junction objects
I think B is the correct answer. like in account and contact relationship for any single account we can have multiple contacts. in the same way for more than one machinery means we have to create lookup in machinery object to construction job.
I think the answer is B coz machinery can exist without it being assigned to a job.
One job can have many pieces of machinery and while machine can only be on one job at any given time, but we want to track dates and costs, so we can't discard the historical data when moving the machine to a new job.
I think answer is 'b' because one construction job can have more than one machinery. It means it is one to many. Question didn't talk about it is tightly coupled child records existence depends on Parent.
a is the right answer. 1. Master-detail relation does not apply. We wouldn't want a child deleted upon deletion of parent 2. Junction object isn't needed as I would assume a machinery can't be at 2 different sites at the same time
Nope. I was wrong. I would go for c
I still think the answer is: A. Many-to-many seems wrong because it clearly states "More than one piece of machinery can be assigned to *one* construction job", no? Isn't it saying one-to-many there?
I agree with your answer, we can assume more than two machineries are using for one construction job. So, MD is only allowed up to 2 relationships, so I think Lookup is better answer than MD.
I think the answer is B coz machinery can exist without it being assigned to a job.
I think the answer is D
C is the answer.
a is the right answer. 1. Master-detail relation does not apply. We wouldn't want a child deleted upon deletion of parent 2. Junction object isn't needed as I would assume a machinery can't be at 2 different sites at the same time
C is correct