Re: primary key and existing unique fields
| От | Mike Mascari |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: primary key and existing unique fields |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 417EA3BB.1040500@mascari.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: primary key and existing unique fields ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: primary key and existing unique fields
Re: primary key and existing unique fields |
| Список | pgsql-general |
Joshua D. Drake wrote: > Sally Sally wrote: > >> Can you please elaborate on the point you just made as to why the >> primary key should not relate to the data (even for a case when there >> is an existing unique field that can be used to identify the record) >> > > Here is a good article on the topic: > > http://www.devx.com/ibm/Article/20702 That article makes me want to vomit uncontrollably! ;-) "Business data might also simply be bad -- glitches in the Social Security Administration's system may lead to different persons having the same Social Security Number. A surrogate key helps to isolate the system from such problems." The surrogate key isn't solving the underlying logical inconsistency problem. It is being used as a work-around to cover one up. I suspect the author of being a MySQL user. Mike Mascari
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: