Re: Design question...

There is hardly any difference, except the waste of space for the state_id. But purists will tell you, that you should not put business information into primary key columns, and therefore state_code should not be a primary key. And if a state is gets a new code, it is much easier to change your data if state_code is not PK/FK....

Rgds, Bjørn.

On Wednesday 17 April 2002 19:18, Grabowy, Chris wrote:
> To simplify my question, if I am creating a STATE table to hold all the
> states of the US, should I create it like this...
>
> Name Null? Type
> ----------------------------------------- --------
> ----------------------------
> STATE_CODE NOT NULL CHAR(2) <-- PK
>
> STATE_DESC NOT NULL VARCHAR2(50)
>
> or like this...
>
> Name Null? Type
> ----------------------------------------- --------
> ----------------------------
> STATE_ID NOT NULL NUMBER <-- PK
> STATE_CODE NOT NULL CHAR(2)
> STATE_DESC NOT NULL VARCHAR2(50)
>
> I'm trying to figure out which is more efficient, STATE_CODE or STATE_ID,
> when doing a PK lookup, dealing with FKs, etc.
>
> Many TIA!!!
>
> Chris

-- 
Bjørn Engsig, Miracle A/S
http://MiracleAS.dk
-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
-- 
Author: =?iso-8859-1?q?Bj=F8rn=20Engsig?=
  INET: bjorn_at_MiracleAS.dk

Fat City Network Services    -- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California        -- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists
--------------------------------------------------------------------
To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: ListGuru_at_fatcity.com (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).