Re: IS it a good practice to use SERIAL as Primary Key?

From: Scott Ribe <scott_ribe(at)killerbytes(dot)com>
To: John McCawley <nospam(at)hardgeus(dot)com>, Ron Johnson <ron(dot)l(dot)johnson(at)cox(dot)net>
Cc: <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: IS it a good practice to use SERIAL as Primary Key?
Date: 2006-11-27 21:24:06
Message-ID: C190A586.5C29B%scott_ribe@killerbytes.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

> Right, but when you write your script (or whatever) that cleans these
> keys up and does the merge, you're where you started -- arbitrary
> integer keys with no meaning. If you merge databases where the keys are
> *supposed* to have meaning, you then have to mangle *real* data to make
> them merge.

Also, there are plenty of circumstances besides the sale/merge one I
mentioned which would require account # changes but not require changes to
the synthetic keys.

--
Scott Ribe
scott_ribe(at)killerbytes(dot)com
http://www.killerbytes.com/
(303) 722-0567 voice

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joshua D. Drake 2006-11-27 21:27:49 Re: IS it a good practice to use SERIAL as Primary Key?
Previous Message Ranjan Kumar Baisak 2006-11-27 21:13:07 Re: DB crashed