Weak Entities - Learning Module

Loading content...

0/241

Identifying Relationship

The Bridge That Provides Identity

In the previous page, we established that weak entities suffer from an "identity crisis"—they cannot uniquely identify themselves using only their own attributes. The solution to this crisis lies in a special type of relationship that does more than just connect two entities. It fundamentally transforms the nature of the weak entity by providing the missing piece of its identity.

This special relationship is called an identifying relationship (also known as a weak relationship or ID-dependent relationship). Unlike regular relationships that merely associate independent entities, an identifying relationship is essential to the very existence and identification of the weak entity.

Understanding identifying relationships is crucial because they dictate how weak entities are structured in the conceptual model and how they translate to primary keys and foreign keys in the relational model.

What You Will Learn

By the end of this page, you will understand the formal definition of identifying relationships, how they differ from regular relationships, the constraints they impose, how they transfer identity from owner to weak entity, and the proper notation and modeling techniques for representing them in ER diagrams.

Formal Definition of Identifying Relationships

An identifying relationship is a relationship between a weak entity type W and its owner entity type O with the following properties:

Identity Transfer — The primary key of O becomes part of the primary key of W. The relationship is the mechanism by which this identity is transferred.
Existence Implication — The existence of any instance of W implies the existence of a corresponding instance of O. You cannot create a W without first having an O.
Mandatory Participation — W has total (mandatory) participation in the relationship. Every instance of the weak entity must participate in exactly one instance of the identifying relationship.
Single Owner — Each instance of W is associated with exactly one instance of O through the identifying relationship. The relationship has a cardinality constraint of 1 on the O side for each W instance.

Formal Notation:

Let W be a weak entity type with partial key D, and let O be its owner entity type with primary key K_O. The identifying relationship R connects W and O such that:

PK(W) = K_O ∪ D (the primary key of W is the union of owner's key and partial key)
∀w ∈ W: ∃! o ∈ O such that (w, o) ∈ R (every W participates with exactly one O)
If o is deleted from O, all w where (w, o) ∈ R must also be deleted

The Identity Pipeline

Think of the identifying relationship as a pipeline that carries identity from the owner to the weak entity. The owner's primary key flows through this relationship and becomes an integral part of the weak entity's identity. Without this pipeline, the weak entity has no source of unique identification.

Identifying vs. Regular Relationships

Understanding the distinction between identifying and regular (non-identifying) relationships is fundamental to accurate database design. These two types of relationships serve different purposes and have different constraints.

Comprehensive Comparison of Relationship Types
Aspect	Identifying Relationship	Regular Relationship
Primary Purpose	Provides identity to weak entity	Associates independent entities
Participation (Weak/Child Side)	Always total (mandatory)	Can be partial or total
Cardinality (Owner/Parent Side)	Always 1 (exactly one owner)	Can be 1:1, 1:N, or M:N
Key Contribution	Owner's PK becomes part of child's PK	Foreign key references parent's PK
Foreign Key Nullable?	Never (part of primary key)	May be nullable (partial participation)
Deletion Behavior	Must cascade (existence dependency)	May cascade, restrict, or set null
Entity Independence	Child cannot exist without parent	Both entities can exist independently
ER Notation (Chen)	Double diamond	Single diamond
ER Notation (Crow's Foot)	Solid line, identifying symbol	Regular line with cardinality markers
Creation Order	Parent must exist before child	No strict ordering required

Example: Identifying Relationship

Employee ═══╗═══ Dependent
            ║
        SUPPORTS

Dependent's PK: (EmployeeID, DependentName)
EmployeeID comes from the relationship
Deleting Employee cascades to Dependents
A Dependent cannot exist without an Employee

Example: Regular Relationship

Customer ───┬─── Order
            │
          PLACES

Order's PK: (OrderID) — stands alone
CustomerID is just a foreign key
Deleting Customer may or may not cascade
An Order has its own independent identity

The Key Distinction

The fundamental difference is whether the parent's primary key becomes part of the child's primary key. In an identifying relationship, it does—creating a composite key. In a regular relationship, the parent's key is referenced via a foreign key but doesn't contribute to the child's identity.

Structural Constraints of Identifying Relationships

Identifying relationships impose strict structural constraints that must be understood and enforced during database design and implementation.

Cardinality Constraints

•Owner-to-Weak Cardinality — One owner can have zero, one, or many weak entities. The maximum cardinality on the weak entity side is typically N (many), though business rules might restrict it to a specific number.
•Weak-to-Owner Cardinality — Each weak entity instance is associated with exactly one owner instance. This is not just a maximum constraint; it's both minimum and maximum of 1.
•Expressed as Ratios — The identifying relationship is 1:N from owner to weak entity. A 1:1 identifying relationship is theoretically possible but rare—it often suggests the weak entity should be merged with the owner.
•M:N Not Applicable — An identifying relationship cannot be M:N because each weak entity must have a single, unambiguous owner. If multiple owners are needed, the entity has multiple sources of identity and requires a different design pattern.

Participation Constraints

•Weak Entity: Total Participation — Every weak entity instance must participate in the identifying relationship. There is no such thing as an unattached weak entity. In implementation terms, the foreign key column(s) cannot be NULL.
•Owner Entity: Partial Participation — The owner may or may not have associated weak entities. An Employee can exist without any Dependents. A Building can exist without any Rooms (during planning phase). This is partial participation.
•Notational Representation — In Chen notation, total participation is shown with a double line from weak entity to relationship. Partial participation uses a single line from owner to relationship.

Converting Mermaid diagram...

Referential Integrity Constraints:

The identifying relationship enforces specific referential integrity rules:

Insert Rule: Cannot insert a weak entity without an existing owner. The foreign key (owner's PK) must reference an existing row in the owner table.
Delete Rule: Deleting an owner must cascade to delete all associated weak entities. This is not optional—it's inherent to the existence dependency.
Update Rule: If the owner's primary key is updated, the change must cascade to all associated weak entities to maintain the composite key integrity.

These constraints are typically implemented using ON DELETE CASCADE and ON UPDATE CASCADE in SQL foreign key definitions.

Role in Primary Key Formation

The identifying relationship plays a critical role in forming the primary key of the weak entity. This is the mechanism by which identity is actually transferred from owner to weak entity.

Key Formation Process

•Extract Owner's Primary Key — Identify the primary key attribute(s) of the owner entity. For Employee, this might be EmployeeID. For a composite key owner, all key attributes are included.
•Identify Partial Key — Determine the discriminator (partial key) of the weak entity. This is the attribute(s) that uniquely identify weak entity instances within the scope of one owner.
•Compose Full Primary Key — Concatenate: PK(WeakEntity) = PK(Owner) + PartialKey(WeakEntity). This composite key uniquely identifies each weak entity instance globally.
•Implement Foreign Key — The owner's primary key attributes appear in the weak entity table as both foreign key (enforcing the relationship) and part of the primary key (providing identity).

key_formation_example.sql
SQL
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
-- Owner Entity Table
CREATE TABLE Employee (
    employee_id     VARCHAR(10) PRIMARY KEY,
    name            VARCHAR(100) NOT NULL,
    department      VARCHAR(50),
    hire_date       DATE
);
 
-- Weak Entity Table with Composite Primary Key
CREATE TABLE Dependent (
    -- Foreign key from identifying relationship (also part of PK)
    employee_id     VARCHAR(10) NOT NULL,
    
    -- Partial key (discriminator)
    dependent_name  VARCHAR(100) NOT NULL,
    
    -- Other attributes
    birth_date      DATE,
    relationship    VARCHAR(20),
    
    -- Composite Primary Key: Owner's PK + Partial Key
    PRIMARY KEY (employee_id, dependent_name),
    
    -- Foreign Key with Cascade Rules
    FOREIGN KEY (employee_id) 
        REFERENCES Employee(employee_id)
        ON DELETE CASCADE
        ON UPDATE CASCADE
);
 
-- Insert examples
INSERT INTO Employee VALUES ('E001', 'John Smith', 'Engineering', '2020-01-15');
INSERT INTO Dependent VALUES ('E001', 'Sarah', '2015-03-20', 'Daughter');
INSERT INTO Dependent VALUES ('E001', 'Michael', '2018-07-10', 'Son');
 
-- The composite key ensures uniqueness:
-- ('E001', 'Sarah') is unique
-- ('E001', 'Michael') is unique
-- If another employee E002 has a child named Sarah:
-- ('E002', 'Sarah') is also unique and distinct from ('E001', 'Sarah')

Multi-Level Weak Entities

A weak entity can itself be the owner of another weak entity, creating a chain. For example: Building → Room → Outlet (power outlet). The key cascades: Outlet's PK = (BuildingID, RoomNumber, OutletNumber). Each level adds its partial key to the growing composite.

Multiple Identifying Relationships

In complex scenarios, a weak entity may require identity from multiple owner entities. This occurs when the weak entity represents a relationship or intersection between multiple strong entities, and that relationship cannot exist without all its participating entities.

Scenario: Course-Section-TimeSlot

Consider a university scheduling system:

Course (CourseCode) — A strong entity
Semester (SemesterCode) — A strong entity
Section (SectionNumber) — A weak entity

A Section is a specific offering of a Course in a Semester. It cannot exist without both:

Knowing which Course it's for
Knowing which Semester it's offered in

SectionNumber (like "001", "002") is only unique within a specific Course-Semester combination.

Primary Key of Section: (CourseCode, SemesterCode, SectionNumber)

The Section has two identifying relationships:

One with Course (provides CourseCode to the key)
One with Semester (provides SemesterCode to the key)

Converting Mermaid diagram...

Design Consideration

Multiple identifying relationships increase key complexity significantly. A Section's primary key has three components. If Section were owner to another weak entity (say, ClassMeeting), that entity's key would have four components. Consider whether this complexity is justified or if surrogate keys would simplify the design.

Implementation Considerations:

Join Complexity — Queries involving multi-owner weak entities require joining multiple tables. This can impact performance.
Composite Foreign Keys — References to the weak entity from other tables must include ALL key components.
Data Integrity — All owners must exist before the weak entity can be created. Deletion of ANY owner cascades to the weak entity.
Surrogate Key Alternative — For very complex keys, consider adding a surrogate key (SectionID) while maintaining the natural key as a unique constraint. This provides the benefits of both approaches.

ER Diagram Representation

Properly representing identifying relationships in ER diagrams requires careful attention to notation. Different notation systems have evolved, and understanding them all ensures you can read and create diagrams across various tools and standards.

Peter Chen's Original ER Notation:

In Chen notation, the identifying relationship has distinct visual markers:

Double Diamond — The relationship is enclosed in a double-bordered diamond, immediately distinguishing it from regular relationships (single diamond).
Double Rectangle — The weak entity is enclosed in a double-bordered rectangle.
Double Lines — A double line connects the weak entity to the identifying relationship, indicating total participation.
Dashed Underline — The partial key attribute in the weak entity is underlined with a dashed line (as opposed to the solid underline for regular primary keys).
1:N Cardinality — The relationship shows 1 on the owner side and N on the weak entity side.

Reading the Diagram: When you see a double-bordered rectangle connected by double lines to a double-bordered diamond, which in turn connects to a single-bordered rectangle, you're looking at a weak entity (double rectangle) in an identifying relationship (double diamond) with its owner (single rectangle).

Design Decisions and Trade-offs

Choosing to model a relationship as identifying versus regular has significant implications for your database design. These decisions should be made deliberately, considering the trade-offs.

Advantages of Identifying Relationships

•Semantic Clarity — The design accurately reflects real-world identity dependencies
•Automatic Cascade — Deletion behavior is inherently correct without manual intervention
•Query Efficiency — Composite keys can be efficient for certain access patterns
•No Orphans — Database constraints prevent orphaned records by structure
•Natural Joins — Related data can be retrieved using key components alone

Disadvantages of Identifying Relationships

•Key Complexity — Composite keys can become unwieldy, especially in multi-level hierarchies
•Cascading Changes — Updates to owner's key ripple through all weak entities
•ORM Challenges — Many ORM frameworks prefer simple surrogate keys
•Reference Complexity — Foreign keys to weak entities must include all key components
•Reduced Flexibility — Hard to restructure later if requirements change

When to Use Identifying Relationships

Use identifying relationships when: (1) The weak entity truly has no independent identity, (2) Cascade delete is always the correct behavior, (3) The composite key has natural business meaning, (4) The depth of weak entity nesting is limited (2-3 levels max). Consider alternatives when keys become too complex or when flexibility is needed.

Alternative: Surrogate Key with Constraints

If composite keys become unwieldy, consider this alternative pattern:

CREATE TABLE Dependent (
    dependent_id    INT PRIMARY KEY AUTO_INCREMENT,  -- Surrogate key
    employee_id     VARCHAR(10) NOT NULL,
    dependent_name  VARCHAR(100) NOT NULL,
    birth_date      DATE,
    relationship    VARCHAR(20),
    UNIQUE (employee_id, dependent_name),  -- Enforce natural uniqueness
    FOREIGN KEY (employee_id) REFERENCES Employee(employee_id)
        ON DELETE CASCADE
);

This provides:

Simple primary key for references
Natural key constraint for data integrity
Same cascade behavior
Semantic clarity is preserved in the unique constraint

The trade-off is slightly weaker semantic modeling in exchange for practical simplicity.

Summary: Identifying Relationships

We've explored the identifying relationship—the bridge that provides identity to weak entities. Let's consolidate the essential concepts:

Key Takeaways

•Identifying relationships transfer identity — The owner's primary key flows through the relationship to become part of the weak entity's primary key.
•Weak entities have total participation — Every weak entity instance must participate in its identifying relationship. There are no orphaned weak entities.
•Cardinality is always 1:N — One owner can have many weak entities, but each weak entity has exactly one owner.
•Cascade delete is inherent — Deleting an owner must delete all associated weak entities to maintain existence dependency.
•Notation matters — Different diagramming standards represent identifying relationships differently. Learn to recognize them in Chen, Crow's Foot, and UML notations.
•Design is a trade-off — Composite keys provide semantic clarity but can add complexity. Consider the appropriate level for your use case.

What's Next:

Now that we understand how identifying relationships provide identity to weak entities, we'll examine the partial key (discriminator) in detail—the attribute(s) within the weak entity that, when combined with the owner's key, create a unique identifier. We'll explore how to select appropriate partial keys and handle complex scenarios.

Page Complete

You now understand identifying relationships—their definition, constraints, role in key formation, notation, and design trade-offs. Next, we'll examine partial keys: the weak entity's contribution to its composite identity.

Identifying Relationship

The Bridge That Provides Identity

What You Will Learn

Formal Definition of Identifying Relationships

An identifying relationship is a relationship between a weak entity type W and its owner entity type O with the following properties:

Identity Transfer — The primary key of O becomes part of the primary key of W. The relationship is the mechanism by which this identity is transferred.
Existence Implication — The existence of any instance of W implies the existence of a corresponding instance of O. You cannot create a W without first having an O.
Mandatory Participation — W has total (mandatory) participation in the relationship. Every instance of the weak entity must participate in exactly one instance of the identifying relationship.
Single Owner — Each instance of W is associated with exactly one instance of O through the identifying relationship. The relationship has a cardinality constraint of 1 on the O side for each W instance.

Formal Notation:

Let W be a weak entity type with partial key D, and let O be its owner entity type with primary key K_O. The identifying relationship R connects W and O such that:

PK(W) = K_O ∪ D (the primary key of W is the union of owner's key and partial key)
∀w ∈ W: ∃! o ∈ O such that (w, o) ∈ R (every W participates with exactly one O)
If o is deleted from O, all w where (w, o) ∈ R must also be deleted

The Identity Pipeline

Identifying vs. Regular Relationships

Comprehensive Comparison of Relationship Types
Aspect	Identifying Relationship	Regular Relationship
Primary Purpose	Provides identity to weak entity	Associates independent entities
Participation (Weak/Child Side)	Always total (mandatory)	Can be partial or total
Cardinality (Owner/Parent Side)	Always 1 (exactly one owner)	Can be 1:1, 1:N, or M:N
Key Contribution	Owner's PK becomes part of child's PK	Foreign key references parent's PK
Foreign Key Nullable?	Never (part of primary key)	May be nullable (partial participation)
Deletion Behavior	Must cascade (existence dependency)	May cascade, restrict, or set null
Entity Independence	Child cannot exist without parent	Both entities can exist independently
ER Notation (Chen)	Double diamond	Single diamond
ER Notation (Crow's Foot)	Solid line, identifying symbol	Regular line with cardinality markers
Creation Order	Parent must exist before child	No strict ordering required

Example: Identifying Relationship

Employee ═══╗═══ Dependent
            ║
        SUPPORTS

Dependent's PK: (EmployeeID, DependentName)
EmployeeID comes from the relationship
Deleting Employee cascades to Dependents
A Dependent cannot exist without an Employee

Example: Regular Relationship

Customer ───┬─── Order
            │
          PLACES

Order's PK: (OrderID) — stands alone
CustomerID is just a foreign key
Deleting Customer may or may not cascade
An Order has its own independent identity

The Key Distinction

Structural Constraints of Identifying Relationships

Identifying relationships impose strict structural constraints that must be understood and enforced during database design and implementation.

Cardinality Constraints

•Owner-to-Weak Cardinality — One owner can have zero, one, or many weak entities. The maximum cardinality on the weak entity side is typically N (many), though business rules might restrict it to a specific number.
•Weak-to-Owner Cardinality — Each weak entity instance is associated with exactly one owner instance. This is not just a maximum constraint; it's both minimum and maximum of 1.
•Expressed as Ratios — The identifying relationship is 1:N from owner to weak entity. A 1:1 identifying relationship is theoretically possible but rare—it often suggests the weak entity should be merged with the owner.
•M:N Not Applicable — An identifying relationship cannot be M:N because each weak entity must have a single, unambiguous owner. If multiple owners are needed, the entity has multiple sources of identity and requires a different design pattern.

Participation Constraints

•Weak Entity: Total Participation — Every weak entity instance must participate in the identifying relationship. There is no such thing as an unattached weak entity. In implementation terms, the foreign key column(s) cannot be NULL.
•Owner Entity: Partial Participation — The owner may or may not have associated weak entities. An Employee can exist without any Dependents. A Building can exist without any Rooms (during planning phase). This is partial participation.
•Notational Representation — In Chen notation, total participation is shown with a double line from weak entity to relationship. Partial participation uses a single line from owner to relationship.

Converting Mermaid diagram...

Referential Integrity Constraints:

The identifying relationship enforces specific referential integrity rules:

Insert Rule: Cannot insert a weak entity without an existing owner. The foreign key (owner's PK) must reference an existing row in the owner table.
Delete Rule: Deleting an owner must cascade to delete all associated weak entities. This is not optional—it's inherent to the existence dependency.
Update Rule: If the owner's primary key is updated, the change must cascade to all associated weak entities to maintain the composite key integrity.

These constraints are typically implemented using ON DELETE CASCADE and ON UPDATE CASCADE in SQL foreign key definitions.

Role in Primary Key Formation

The identifying relationship plays a critical role in forming the primary key of the weak entity. This is the mechanism by which identity is actually transferred from owner to weak entity.

Key Formation Process

•Extract Owner's Primary Key — Identify the primary key attribute(s) of the owner entity. For Employee, this might be EmployeeID. For a composite key owner, all key attributes are included.
•Identify Partial Key — Determine the discriminator (partial key) of the weak entity. This is the attribute(s) that uniquely identify weak entity instances within the scope of one owner.
•Compose Full Primary Key — Concatenate: PK(WeakEntity) = PK(Owner) + PartialKey(WeakEntity). This composite key uniquely identifies each weak entity instance globally.
•Implement Foreign Key — The owner's primary key attributes appear in the weak entity table as both foreign key (enforcing the relationship) and part of the primary key (providing identity).

key_formation_example.sql
SQL
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
-- Owner Entity Table
CREATE TABLE Employee (
    employee_id     VARCHAR(10) PRIMARY KEY,
    name            VARCHAR(100) NOT NULL,
    department      VARCHAR(50),
    hire_date       DATE
);
 
-- Weak Entity Table with Composite Primary Key
CREATE TABLE Dependent (
    -- Foreign key from identifying relationship (also part of PK)
    employee_id     VARCHAR(10) NOT NULL,
    
    -- Partial key (discriminator)
    dependent_name  VARCHAR(100) NOT NULL,
    
    -- Other attributes
    birth_date      DATE,
    relationship    VARCHAR(20),
    
    -- Composite Primary Key: Owner's PK + Partial Key
    PRIMARY KEY (employee_id, dependent_name),
    
    -- Foreign Key with Cascade Rules
    FOREIGN KEY (employee_id) 
        REFERENCES Employee(employee_id)
        ON DELETE CASCADE
        ON UPDATE CASCADE
);
 
-- Insert examples
INSERT INTO Employee VALUES ('E001', 'John Smith', 'Engineering', '2020-01-15');
INSERT INTO Dependent VALUES ('E001', 'Sarah', '2015-03-20', 'Daughter');
INSERT INTO Dependent VALUES ('E001', 'Michael', '2018-07-10', 'Son');
 
-- The composite key ensures uniqueness:
-- ('E001', 'Sarah') is unique
-- ('E001', 'Michael') is unique
-- If another employee E002 has a child named Sarah:
-- ('E002', 'Sarah') is also unique and distinct from ('E001', 'Sarah')

Multi-Level Weak Entities

Multiple Identifying Relationships

Scenario: Course-Section-TimeSlot

Consider a university scheduling system:

Course (CourseCode) — A strong entity
Semester (SemesterCode) — A strong entity
Section (SectionNumber) — A weak entity

A Section is a specific offering of a Course in a Semester. It cannot exist without both:

Knowing which Course it's for
Knowing which Semester it's offered in

SectionNumber (like "001", "002") is only unique within a specific Course-Semester combination.

Primary Key of Section: (CourseCode, SemesterCode, SectionNumber)

The Section has two identifying relationships:

One with Course (provides CourseCode to the key)
One with Semester (provides SemesterCode to the key)

Converting Mermaid diagram...

Design Consideration

Implementation Considerations:

Join Complexity — Queries involving multi-owner weak entities require joining multiple tables. This can impact performance.
Composite Foreign Keys — References to the weak entity from other tables must include ALL key components.
Data Integrity — All owners must exist before the weak entity can be created. Deletion of ANY owner cascades to the weak entity.
Surrogate Key Alternative — For very complex keys, consider adding a surrogate key (SectionID) while maintaining the natural key as a unique constraint. This provides the benefits of both approaches.

ER Diagram Representation

Peter Chen's Original ER Notation:

In Chen notation, the identifying relationship has distinct visual markers:

Double Diamond — The relationship is enclosed in a double-bordered diamond, immediately distinguishing it from regular relationships (single diamond).
Double Rectangle — The weak entity is enclosed in a double-bordered rectangle.
Double Lines — A double line connects the weak entity to the identifying relationship, indicating total participation.
Dashed Underline — The partial key attribute in the weak entity is underlined with a dashed line (as opposed to the solid underline for regular primary keys).
1:N Cardinality — The relationship shows 1 on the owner side and N on the weak entity side.

Design Decisions and Trade-offs

Choosing to model a relationship as identifying versus regular has significant implications for your database design. These decisions should be made deliberately, considering the trade-offs.

Advantages of Identifying Relationships

•Semantic Clarity — The design accurately reflects real-world identity dependencies
•Automatic Cascade — Deletion behavior is inherently correct without manual intervention
•Query Efficiency — Composite keys can be efficient for certain access patterns
•No Orphans — Database constraints prevent orphaned records by structure
•Natural Joins — Related data can be retrieved using key components alone

Disadvantages of Identifying Relationships

•Key Complexity — Composite keys can become unwieldy, especially in multi-level hierarchies
•Cascading Changes — Updates to owner's key ripple through all weak entities
•ORM Challenges — Many ORM frameworks prefer simple surrogate keys
•Reference Complexity — Foreign keys to weak entities must include all key components
•Reduced Flexibility — Hard to restructure later if requirements change

When to Use Identifying Relationships

Alternative: Surrogate Key with Constraints

If composite keys become unwieldy, consider this alternative pattern:

CREATE TABLE Dependent (
    dependent_id    INT PRIMARY KEY AUTO_INCREMENT,  -- Surrogate key
    employee_id     VARCHAR(10) NOT NULL,
    dependent_name  VARCHAR(100) NOT NULL,
    birth_date      DATE,
    relationship    VARCHAR(20),
    UNIQUE (employee_id, dependent_name),  -- Enforce natural uniqueness
    FOREIGN KEY (employee_id) REFERENCES Employee(employee_id)
        ON DELETE CASCADE
);

This provides:

Simple primary key for references
Natural key constraint for data integrity
Same cascade behavior
Semantic clarity is preserved in the unique constraint

The trade-off is slightly weaker semantic modeling in exchange for practical simplicity.

Summary: Identifying Relationships

We've explored the identifying relationship—the bridge that provides identity to weak entities. Let's consolidate the essential concepts:

Key Takeaways

•Identifying relationships transfer identity — The owner's primary key flows through the relationship to become part of the weak entity's primary key.
•Weak entities have total participation — Every weak entity instance must participate in its identifying relationship. There are no orphaned weak entities.
•Cardinality is always 1:N — One owner can have many weak entities, but each weak entity has exactly one owner.
•Cascade delete is inherent — Deleting an owner must delete all associated weak entities to maintain existence dependency.
•Notation matters — Different diagramming standards represent identifying relationships differently. Learn to recognize them in Chen, Crow's Foot, and UML notations.
•Design is a trade-off — Composite keys provide semantic clarity but can add complexity. Consider the appropriate level for your use case.

What's Next:

Page Complete