In article <5u7nct$4kh_at_nntp02.primenet.com>, KE Fein
<kfein_at_primenet.com> writes
>I am no Oracle expert, nor an Oracle employee, but as part of my Oracle DBA
>training I was shown in class how a row in a table can migrate within the block
>and datafile subsequent to update statements. I think it would be misleading
>to say that that constitues a new row. Comments?
No it isn't a new row, and the terminology in this thread
is becoming a problem. People seem to be mixing row and rowid.
As a designer and developer, I would never, repeat never ever,
allow any application I was responsible for to rely on rowid.
Even if you happened to get away with it in the particular case,
Oracle would be quite entitled to change the behavoir, although
*I believe* current policy is to allow backward compatibilty for
one major release. In my opinion: Don't rely on it, don't do it. No!
From a DB purist point of view, rowid isn't there anyway, its just
a vendor feature. (That should start something...) ;-)
Steve
--
"The floggings will continue until morale improves."
Received on Sat Aug 30 1997 - 00:00:00 CDT
