$1.$ How many records does the above file contain? How many fields are there per record?

Ans$)$ As per the file above we have seven records as they are from $21-5$Z to $31-7$P$.$ There are

$5$ fields in the above file and they are; PROJECT$\_$CODE, PROJECT$\_$MANAGER,

MANAGER$\_$PHONE, MANAGER$\_$ADDRESS, PROJECT$\_$BID$\_$PRICE.

$2.$ What problem would you encounter if you wanted to produce a listing by city? How

would you solve this problem by altering the file structure?

Ans$)$ If we list by city the problem we encounter is having common identifier to link the

records. To help solve the problem is to Add a separate field for "CITY": This would

allow you to easily query and sort data by city without parsing the address field

$3.$ If you wanted to produce a listing of the file contents by last name, area code, city, state,

or zip code, how would you alter the file structure?

Ans$)$ Similar to the city issue, to easily list by any of these criteria, you'd need to add separate

fields for each:

A$)$ LAST$\_$NAME: Extract the last name from the "PROJECT$\_$MANAGER" field.

B$)$ AREA$\_$CODE: Extract the area code from the "MANAGER$\_$PHONE" field.

C$)$ STATE: Extract the state from the "MANAGER$\_$ADDRESS" field.

D$)$ ZIP$\_$CODE: Extract the ZIP code from the "MANAGER$\_$ADDRESS" field.

$4.$ What data redundancies do you detect? How could those redundancies lead to

anomalies?

Ans$)$ There's redundancy in the "MANAGER$\_$ADDRESS" field, as it includes city, state, and

ZIP code information already captured in separate fields. This redundancy could lead to

anomalies if:

A$)$ The city, state, or ZIP code in the address field doesn't match the corresponding dedicated

fields. For example, if the address has "Gainesville, FL$"$ but the city field is "Nashville,

TN$",$ that's an inconsistency.

B$)$ The address field is updated, but the corresponding individual fields $($city$,$ state, ZIP

code$)$ aren't updated simultaneously, creating discrepancies.

$5.$ Identify the attributes in Figure P$1\mathrm{.}1.$ What would you name this table$($the name of the

entity$)?$

Ans$)$

A$)$ The attributes are:

$1)$ PROJECT$\_$CODE

$2)$ PROJECT$\_$MANAGER

$3)$ MANAGER$\_$PHONE

$4)$ MANAGER$\_$ADDRESS

$5)$ CITY $($proposed addition$)$

$6)$ STATE $($proposed addition$)$

$7)$ ZIP$\_$CODE $($proposed addition$)$

$8)$ LAST$\_$NAME $($proposed addition$)$

$9)$ AREA$\_$CODE $($proposed addition$)$

$10)$ PROJECT$\_$BID$\_$PRICE

B$)$ I would name this table as MANAGER$\_$INFO

FIGURE P$1\mathrm{.}5$ The File Structure for Problems $6-7$

$6.$ Identify and discuss the serious data redundancy problems exhibited by the file structure

shown in Figure P$1\mathrm{.}5.$

Ans$)1.$ The data redundancy problems exhibited by the file are:

$1.$ The TEACHER$\_$INITIAL column holds two different initials for the teacher, Maria

Cordoza, which are $$I$$ and $$L$.$

This would lead to inconsistency and inaccuracy of data regarding the identification of

the teacher Maria Cordoza. Both the initials would retrieve only partial and incomplete

details of her classes.

$2.$ The DAYS$\_$TIME column holds two classes, one with Horace Willingston and the other

with Maria Cordoza, on the same days and timings $$MWF $8$:$00-8$:$50.$

$3.$ This would lead to inconsistency of data regarding the lecture on $$MWF $8$:$00-8$:$50.$

$7.$ Given the file structure shown in Figure P$1\mathrm{.}5,$ what problem$($s$)$ might you encounter if building

KOM were deleted?

Ans$)$ Deletion of building KOM would lead to the below$-$mentioned consequences:

$1.$ Details of the teacher Maria Cordoza would be deleted from the database.

$2.$ Details of classes on $$MWF$$ would be deleted from the database.

$3.$ This would lead to a lack of data integrity in the database as the data would no longer be

accurate and consistent with the real$-$life scenario.