Re: pervasiveness of surrogate (also called synthetic) keys

From: Scott Ribe <scott_ribe(at)elevated-dev(dot)com>
To: Rob Sargent <robjsargent(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pervasiveness of surrogate (also called synthetic) keys
Date: 2011-04-28 18:31:09
Message-ID: D8550886-DE74-4D06-B7E5-5ED0B9C4FC57@elevated-dev.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Apr 28, 2011, at 11:53 AM, Rob Sargent wrote:

> Hm, I get the feeling that only the good folks at Hibernate seem to think using a "natural key" is the _only_ way to go.

Well, natural keys are quite obviously the way to go, when they exist. The problem is, they usually don't really exist. What's usually proposed as a natural key, will upon further investigation, either not be guaranteed unique, or not guaranteed to be unchanging, or both.

--
Scott Ribe
scott_ribe(at)elevated-dev(dot)com
http://www.elevated-dev.com/
(303) 722-0567 voice

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Daniele Varrazzo 2011-04-28 19:03:43 Re: pervasiveness of surrogate (also called synthetic) keys
Previous Message Joshua D. Drake 2011-04-28 18:26:50 Re: pervasiveness of surrogate (also called synthetic) keys