By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
438,806 Members | 1,787 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 438,806 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

Passive Laddered Bonds: Table Structure?

P: n/a
I posted this on microsoft.public.access - then realized that this was
a more appropriate group.
--------------------------------------------------------

Muni bonds.

Accounts within accounts.... sort of.

Somebody buys 150 mil of XYZ into account A

Trade ticket for 150 mil goes to fund accounting and we need to know
that's where the money is.

BUT: at the time of the trade, the trader allocates 50 mil of 150 to
account D as XYZ, 75 mil to account F as XYZ, and 25 mil to account M
- also as XYZ.

Now XYZ's 150 mil is in the DB twice: a lump in account A and three
pieces in accounts D, F, and M.

But we need to report on accounts A, D, F, and M the same way. i.e.
they are co-equals for reporting purposes.

Doesn't seem like a parent-child relationship.

But what is it?

Some sort of recursive relationship?
I've *really* got to get this one right.

Anybody been here?
Sep 3 '08 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
1 Reply


P: n/a
PeteCresswell (Pe*******@gmail.com) writes:
I posted this on microsoft.public.access - then realized that this was
a more appropriate group.
--------------------------------------------------------

Muni bonds.

Accounts within accounts.... sort of.

Somebody buys 150 mil of XYZ into account A

Trade ticket for 150 mil goes to fund accounting and we need to know
that's where the money is.

BUT: at the time of the trade, the trader allocates 50 mil of 150 to
account D as XYZ, 75 mil to account F as XYZ, and 25 mil to account M
- also as XYZ.

Now XYZ's 150 mil is in the DB twice: a lump in account A and three
pieces in accounts D, F, and M.

But we need to report on accounts A, D, F, and M the same way. i.e.
they are co-equals for reporting purposes.
Seems contradictive to me. If A, D, F and M are peers, then the
asset cannot be two accounts at the same time. That is not at least my
idea of double book-keeping.

If D, F and M are cost centres or somesuch it makes more sense.

In any case, these sort of data modelling questions are very difficult
to do in a newsgroup, because there are so many fine details you need
to know, and so many subtle questions you need to ask. Finance happens
to be my area, but every shop does things in their own way. And the
rules and regulations are different in different countries.
--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, es****@sommarskog.se

Links for SQL Server Books Online:
SQL 2008: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/sqlserver/cc514207.aspx
SQL 2005: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/sqlserver/bb895970.aspx
SQL 2000: http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinf...ons/books.mspx

Sep 3 '08 #2

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.