Re: Surrogate Key vs Production Key

From: Howard J. Rogers <hjr_at_dizwell.com>
Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 13:36:05 +1000
Message-ID: <41675d4e$0$10350$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>

Noons wrote:

> ed.prochak_at_magicinterface.com (Ed prochak) wrote in message
> news:<4b5394b2.0410081003.1a57317f_at_posting.google.com>...

>> 
>> really?  Zero problems?
>> 
>> just wait until you get ONE bug into the production system with
>> surrogate keys and all hell break loose. Or a conversion from such a
>> system where the dump program has a bug.

>
> I don't understand. Are you suggesting that surrogate keys
> are buggy or that only surrogate key systems have bugs?
> Because if you are either of them, then let's talk bridges indeed.
>
>

>> All a surrogate key does is convert a relational model database into a
>> network model database.

>
> That is an impossibility.
>
>

>> I've done it both ways. Both work, but both also have their problems.

>
> Still waiting to hear of one with SKs.

I think French people smell of garlic.

There: will that do as an alternative topic for a flamefest?

;-)

Like topics concerning block sizes or index/table physical separation, I suspect that the discussion about Surrogates versus Natural Keys could run and run and run and run and run. And hurt lots of innocent people on the way. I'm not sure that it's worth all the hassle, however.

Count me in very firmly as a Natural Key man. But I respect your right to eat l'escargot, too.

Regards
HJR Received on Fri Oct 08 2004 - 22:36:05 CDT