Viewing 12 posts - 46 through 57 (of 57 total)
cdesmarais 49673 (10/25/2010)
October 25, 2010 at 2:00 pm
Hugo Kornelis (10/25/2010)
October 25, 2010 at 12:23 pm
gryphonsclaw (10/25/2010)
October 25, 2010 at 12:15 pm
Robert Frasca (10/25/2010)
The whole point of using surrogate keys is to create an additional layer of abstraction
True.
This promotes flexibility and scalability.
It promotes neither. A database using surrogate keys is...
October 25, 2010 at 11:25 am
Ben Sullins-437405 (10/25/2010)
October 25, 2010 at 10:27 am
JJ B (10/25/2010)
October 25, 2010 at 10:20 am
Robert Frasca (10/25/2010)
He said it was a junction table. There aren't typically any non-fk columns.
For a child table, the table's natural key will almost always be the concatenation of...
October 25, 2010 at 10:11 am
Robert Frasca (10/25/2010)
Why would you need to do that? The primary key IS unique. What is the value in pairing a unique value with another unique value?
You're confusing...
October 25, 2010 at 10:08 am
Robert Frasca (10/25/2010)
I'm a little hazy on what you defined as the primary key. If it's a many-to-many relationship how can the combination of the two foreign keys represent...
October 25, 2010 at 8:53 am
Michael Wang (10/25/2010)
October 25, 2010 at 8:39 am
What if the natural key changes? (It can happen and it DOES happen.) This is the primary reason why I always use surrogate keys.
Any rule that has the...
October 25, 2010 at 7:14 am
However, if you want to see the best point made, it is the one by JCamburn at 05/23/2003 : 23:19:21
See http://www.sqlteam.com/forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=6136&whichpage=6
He actually gets it.
Maybe you referenced...
October 25, 2010 at 6:55 am
Viewing 12 posts - 46 through 57 (of 57 total)