I had to watch this video and then do some assignments. After I did those assignments I did not do well. So I came back to this video, after watching it again and seeing my professors feedback it all makes sense after that. Thank you sir!
@3:47 do you mean a2, a3 --> c2 not a2, a3 --> c3? where did you get the c3 from? please be careful next time little things like that causes a huge confusion and messes everything up.
+Shadow He was using the numbers as examples of showing that you cannot have a double relation. Basically saying that you cannot have A->B if ax->by and ax->bz but you can say ay->bx and az -> bx.
I don't find your some lecture's like 45, 50, 51 and many more... there another video's are uploaded.... so please help me to find out those video's... and thank you so much for that... all lecture's are very helpful of us and its just awesome way to teach ...
Do you mean to say that the mapping from A to C need not be a one-one onto function? Because in this example, the mapping is a many-to-one onto function. Can the defiinition of functional dependency be extended to the fact that the mapping between the two attributes A and C must be a function? So if mapping is simply a relation, but not a function, then A and C are not functionally dependent, yeah?
If mapping of C to D is not a function, can its converse be a function? Because let's say that a slight modification of c2 not mapping to d2, then d1and d2 maps to c1, d3 and d4 map to c2. So, if C doesn't functionally determine D, can D functionally determine C (considering the modification)?
Thanks this is amazing but I didn't get what you said about the "options" briefly in the end...! What are they? How are they different from Armstrong axioms?
sir you are saying wrong at one place that c1 determines d1 and c1 determines d2 is incorrect.it can possible dat c1 determines d1 and c1 determines d2.if c1 determines d1 and c2 also determines d1 then there is a problem of redundancy.
This guy just made me understand FD's better in 5 minutes than my university teacher made me understand it in 2 hours. Thank you!!!
True..
Same!!
Still a legend after 7 years. Absolute madman.
After searching for FULL DAY I found here what I was looking for. THNX A LOT MY FRIEND YOU ARE AMAZING.
+comp_coder code_it I know that my mom is amazing you FSOB.
I had to watch this video and then do some assignments. After I did those assignments I did not do well. So I came back to this video, after watching it again and seeing my professors feedback it all makes sense after that. Thank you sir!
You explained dependencies in 5 minutes.... God bless you bro
Just amazing. Functional Dependencies cannot be explained any better.
3:30 onwards is god like. It just explain the whole thing.
Most helpful, and straight forward explanation ever.. Thank You..
@3:47 do you mean a2, a3 --> c2 not a2, a3 --> c3? where did you get the c3 from? please be careful next time little things like that causes a huge confusion and messes everything up.
+Shadow Thankyou! My brain almost exploded
+Shadow He was using the numbers as examples of showing that you cannot have a double relation. Basically saying that you cannot have A->B if ax->by and ax->bz but you can say ay->bx and az -> bx.
GeishaTheSerpantClan Lolz good one
I was also thinking about it ..good to see someone figure it out
please try to watch again and understand before giving a wrong useless comment....REWIND pls.
I don't find your some lecture's like 45, 50, 51 and many more... there another video's are uploaded.... so please help me to find out those video's... and thank you so much for that... all lecture's are very helpful of us and its just awesome way to teach ...
This is an extremely good explanation. Thanks!
I think you mean that a2, a3 ----> c2 not c3 but otherwise, I like the explanation.
Thank you! Very helpful video.
Do you mean to say that the mapping from A to C need not be a one-one onto function? Because in this example, the mapping is a many-to-one onto function. Can the defiinition of functional dependency be extended to the fact that the mapping between the two attributes A and C must be a function? So if mapping is simply a relation, but not a function, then A and C are not functionally dependent, yeah?
Thank you sir, great rundown, very clear. Informative breakdown!
A three hour lecture in seven minutes..... Can I finish the whole course in three hours with techtud XD
it is really helpful thank you
Thank you so much. This is very clear and helpful.
Thanks for this video on Functional Dependencies, it really helped! :)
If mapping of C to D is not a function, can its converse be a function? Because let's say that a slight modification of c2 not mapping to d2, then d1and d2 maps to c1, d3 and d4 map to c2. So, if C doesn't functionally determine D, can D functionally determine C (considering the modification)?
Daim this guy should be my uni professor
Sir your explanation is very nice I saw your all vedios thnxx alot ...
Just curious, can we say C -> A?
got it thanks!
@@danielgwj95 hahahahhahahhahahahahhahahahahahahhqgwfwjzbskwoa.,bskwp
Thanks this is amazing but I didn't get what you said about the "options" briefly in the end...! What are they? How are they different from Armstrong axioms?
man you're awesome way more awesome than my university
Hello sir !! Thank you !! Amazing explaination.
Thats truly a great explanation bro, keep sharing like these
Hi,
Where u have placed ur camera? so close, so clear and no shaking. Just curious.
Thanks.
this is amazing Thank you so much
This all makes sense to me, but is it possible to have say A -> B and C?
Also D->B? It's correct?
If i want to determine all the functional dependencies, should I try every possible combination?
So based on the entity given in this video, the primary key would be D, as A>C, B>C, C>A, D>B, Therefore D>B>C>A, right?
thank you, very helpful
Confusing..Not fully clear... Werz c3?
Sailaja Kavuri .
sir you are saying wrong at one place that c1 determines d1 and c1 determines d2 is incorrect.it can possible dat c1 determines d1 and c1 determines d2.if c1 determines d1 and c2 also determines d1 then there is a problem of redundancy.
+Bibhuti Jha yes that's no possible C->D c1->d1 and c1->d2 not possible
+Bibhuti Jha bro! the link is not working incorrect.it
Life saver thanks man!
i love you techtud pls arrange marriage,...........
Christie Goh 😂😂
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Lol
Awesome easy explanation
simple & clean thanks
great explanation...big thumbs up for ya brother...
What about a(2) -----> b(2)?
where you find a2 and a3=c3?
Yes even I have the same doubt.. How can he keep a-->c it is false statement .
super clearly explained FD
Sorry for including non related topic please help me to solve #Express 45.2346 into simple fraction
thanks for dbms lectures
great explanation
thank you brother...
Good explanation!
does any one have idea how to insert a small screen video on the big one
I love you teacher
i finally understand this thank you!
great work
Thank you! Keep it up bro
thank from your guide
thanks a lot
Thank you so very much :))))
D->B?
thank you
@3:47 it contains BUG ! lol
anyway, nice explanation.
thanks !
thank you it was so clear :)
very nice!!! thank you... :)
good
Thankyou sir
thank you!
thanx
isys224
incorrect
very confusing bro. it's actually very easy then Ur saying. Ur making it complicated
ㅈㄴ 뭐라는지 나만 모르겠냐 ㅡㅡ
Jb english nai ati hai bhai tu urdu ya hindhi ma explain kro confusion barti hai. OK
great explanation
Thank u
thanks