FC0-U71 Data and Database Fundamentals Practice Question

Answer analysis

Option-by-option breakdown

For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.

• ✓

  Second normal form (2NF)

  Why this is correct

  Second normal form requires that all non-key attributes be fully functionally dependent on the entire primary key. Here, ProductName and UnitPrice depend only on ProductID, which is part of the composite primary key (OrderID, ProductID). This partial dependency violates 2NF, and the table should be split to remove the dependency.

• ✗

  First normal form (1NF)

  Why it's wrong here

  First normal form requires that each column contains atomic values and that there are no repeating groups. The table already has atomic values and a primary key of OrderID and ProductID, so it satisfies 1NF. The issue is not about atomicity but about partial dependency, which is addressed in a later normal form.

• ✗

  Third normal form (3NF)

  Why it's wrong here

  Third normal form addresses transitive dependencies, where a non-key attribute depends on another non-key attribute. While the table may also have transitive dependencies, the specific problem described—ProductName and UnitPrice depending on part of the composite key—is a partial dependency, which is a 2NF violation. 3NF is not the primary issue here.

• ✗

  Boyce-Codd normal form (BCNF)

  Why it's wrong here

  Boyce-Codd normal form is a stricter version of 3NF that deals with certain anomalies involving overlapping candidate keys. The scenario describes a partial dependency on a composite primary key, which is a classic 2NF violation. BCNF is not the relevant normal form for this specific dependency issue.