Re: Define a job to run once an year

Mark D Powell wrote:

> Rather than a misuse of a sequence I think the desire to reset once per
> year at year-end is more likely an indication that the sequence number
> is just part of a larger key value, or the result of the need to limit
> the size of number within a limit imposed by legacy systems.
>
> One of the online brokerage firms I have had dealings with appers to
> generate transaction numbers that include the date as the first part of
> the number. It is very likely that the remainder of the number is a
> sequence value. Resetting the sequence value at regular time periods
> when it is not otherwise in use would provide a means to keep the total
> value within a certain set number of digits which may be necessary to
> meet legacy, audit, EDI, and/or legal requirements.
>
> While the widespread restting of sequences would indicate design and
> usage problems I can see where in specific cases such activity is a
> valid business requirement.
>
> IMHO -- Mark D Powell --

Not sure I can agree. There is a well known rule about creating keys that are composites: DON'T!

-- 
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)