Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

GAQM CBAF-001 Exam - Topic 2 Question 49 Discussion

An analyst has discovered that a company wishes to hold information about departments and employees. A department may have many employees in it, but each employee can, at any one time, only work in one department. There is no requirement to store historical information. However, there are currently eight departments and over one hundred employees. How would this relationship be shown on an Entity Relationship diagram?
A) As (8 .. 100) at the Department end of the relationship.
B) As a many-to-many between Department and Employee.
C) As a one-to-one between Department and Employee.
D) As a one-to-many between Departmentand Employee.

GAQM CBAF-001 Exam - Topic 2 Question 49 Discussion

Actual exam question for GAQM's CBAF-001 exam
Question #: 49
Topic #: 2
[All CBAF-001 Questions]

An analyst has discovered that a company wishes to hold information about departments and employees. A department may have many employees in it, but each employee can, at any one time, only work in one department. There is no requirement to store historical information. However, there are currently eight departments and over one hundred employees. How would this relationship be shown on an Entity Relationship diagram?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: A

by Brinda at Jun 21, 2024, 09:06 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium CBAF-001 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Jamal
7 months ago
Just 8 departments and 100+ employees? That's a lot of people per department!
upvoted 0 times
...
Rolf
8 months ago
Option A is misleading; it should be D for sure.
upvoted 0 times
...
Misty
8 months ago
Wait, why isn't it many-to-many? That seems odd.
upvoted 0 times
...
Broderick
8 months ago
I agree, option D makes the most sense here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Yolando
8 months ago
It's definitely a one-to-many relationship!
upvoted 0 times
...
Van
9 months ago
I’m a bit confused about the many-to-many option; it doesn’t seem to fit since each employee is only in one department.
upvoted 0 times
...
Nelida
9 months ago
This question feels similar to the practice problems we did on relationships; I think the answer is D.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jess
9 months ago
I think it might be a one-to-many relationship, but I'm not entirely sure if that's the right terminology.
upvoted 0 times
...
German
9 months ago
I remember we discussed that a department can have many employees, so it can't be one-to-one.
upvoted 0 times
...
Britt
9 months ago
I'm a bit confused on this one. The question mentions there's no requirement to store historical information, so I'm not sure if a one-to-many is the right approach. Maybe a one-to-one would be better since each employee is only associated with one department at a time?
upvoted 0 times
...
Kristian
9 months ago
Okay, let me think this through. Since each employee can only work in one department at a time, but a department can have multiple employees, I agree with Lindsay that a one-to-many relationship is the way to go here. The cardinality would be (1 .. 1) at the Employee end and (1 .. 8) at the Department end.
upvoted 0 times
...
Noble
9 months ago
Hmm, I'm a bit unsure about this one. The question mentions that there are 8 departments and over 100 employees, so I'm not sure if a one-to-many would be the right approach. Maybe a many-to-many would be better to capture the relationship?
upvoted 0 times
...
Lindsay
9 months ago
This seems pretty straightforward. I think the relationship between Department and Employee would be a one-to-many, since each employee can only work in one department at a time, but a department can have multiple employees.
upvoted 0 times
...
Oneida
9 months ago
I'm not too familiar with FSC, so I'll need to do some research on the different features and capabilities. Hopefully I can figure out the right solution for this scenario.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lenna
9 months ago
Okay, let me think this through. The question is asking about clearing the KV store, so I'm guessing the answer is likely one of the "clear" or "delete" commands. I'll eliminate the options that don't seem relevant, like "clean" and "reinitialize".
upvoted 0 times
...
Alton
9 months ago
Hmm, I'm a bit unsure about this one. I know Splunk has various settings for managing data retention, but I'm not totally clear on the specific ones needed here. I'll have to think it through carefully.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alisha
9 months ago
I feel pretty confident about this. The cluster master doesn't have to be different from the singleton master, and it doesn't have to be started with the node manager. I'll double-check the other options, though.
upvoted 0 times
...
Cherelle
10 months ago
This seems like a straightforward question about the most important consideration for management when addressing authentication control weaknesses. I think the impact on the organization's risk profile is the key factor they would want to understand.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tesha
1 year ago
Ah, the age-old conundrum of departments and employees. If only they had a special room for this kind of thing, we could call it the 'Department of Human Resources'!
upvoted 0 times
Rodolfo
1 year ago
C) As a one-to-one between Department and Employee.
upvoted 0 times
...
Sharee
1 year ago
B) As a many-to-many between Department and Employee.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ilene
1 year ago
A) As (8 .. 100) at the Department end of the relationship.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Jules
1 year ago
Hmm, let's see. Many departments, one employee per department. Sounds like a one-to-many relationship to me. Option D is the way to go, folks!
upvoted 0 times
Bettina
1 year ago
Definitely Option D. It matches the criteria of one department having multiple employees.
upvoted 0 times
...
Juliann
1 year ago
I'm leaning towards Option D as well. It fits the description of the relationship.
upvoted 0 times
...
Gilma
1 year ago
Yeah, I agree. Option D makes the most sense in this scenario.
upvoted 0 times
...
Carlee
1 year ago
I think it's a one-to-many relationship too. Option D seems like the best choice.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Juliann
1 year ago
This is a straightforward question. The given information clearly indicates a one-to-many relationship between Department and Employee. Option D is the way to go.
upvoted 0 times
Valentin
1 year ago
I agree, option D is the correct choice in this case.
upvoted 0 times
...
Margarita
1 year ago
I think the relationship should be shown as a one-to-many between Department and Employee.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Tayna
1 year ago
Option D is the correct answer. The relationship between Department and Employee is one-to-many, as each department can have many employees, but each employee can only work in one department at a time.
upvoted 0 times
Anglea
1 year ago
It's important to represent it accurately in the Entity Relationship diagram.
upvoted 0 times
...
Carylon
1 year ago
Exactly, it's a common relationship in database design.
upvoted 0 times
...
Casie
1 year ago
That makes sense, each department can have many employees.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lindsey
1 year ago
D) As a one-to-many between Department and Employee.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Francine
1 year ago
I disagree. I believe it should be shown as a many-to-many between Department and Employee, as a department can have many employees and an employee can work in multiple departments.
upvoted 0 times
...
Francisca
1 year ago
I agree with Buck. Each employee can only work in one department, so it makes sense to have a one-to-many relationship.
upvoted 0 times
...
Buck
1 year ago
I think the relationship should be shown as a one-to-many between Department and Employee.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel