From: | Michael Lewis <mlewis(at)entrata(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com> |
Cc: | stan <stanb(at)panix(dot)com>, pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: FW: Re: FW: Re: Shouldn;t this trigger be called? |
Date: | 2019-09-19 21:54:40 |
Message-ID: | CAHOFxGrZqPDOTheMT+kMb2sUSvg7SiFvr=d2-gugwxBr_mMDaw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
You can also look at citext type to avoid the casting.
customer_key integer DEFAULT
nextval('customer_key_serial') PRIMARY KEY ,
cust_no smallint NOT NULL UNIQUE ,
name varchar UNIQUE ,
Why do you have a surrogate primary key generated by a sequence when you
have a natural key of either cust_no or name? Why not just declare the
customer number to be the PK? Where does customer number come from anyway?
Using smallint seems potentially short-sighted on potential future growth,
but changing the type later should be minimal work as long as you don't
have this customer_number denormalized many places, or use it as the FKey
after dropping customer_key surrogate key.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2019-09-19 21:55:27 | Re: is it safe to drop 25 tb schema with cascade option? |
Previous Message | Adrian Klaver | 2019-09-19 21:49:48 | Re: is it safe to drop 25 tb schema with cascade option? |