Re: IS it a good practice to use SERIAL as Primary Key?

From: "Brandon Aiken" <BAiken(at)winemantech(dot)com>
To: <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: IS it a good practice to use SERIAL as Primary Key?
Date: 2006-11-27 22:10:28
Message-ID: F8E84F0F56445B4CB39E019EF67DACBA3C4D1B@exchsrvr.winemantech.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Shenanigans!

That problem occurs regardless of whether or not you use surrogate keys.
You have exceeded the scope of the example.

--
Brandon Aiken
CS/IT Systems Engineer

-----Original Message-----
From: pgsql-general-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
[mailto:pgsql-general-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] On Behalf Of Scott Ribe
Sent: Monday, November 27, 2006 4:01 PM
To: Joshua D. Drake; pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] IS it a good practice to use SERIAL as Primary
Key?

> You would update the address, the address id wouldn't change. If you
> want to keep track of old addresses you would keep an archive table
> associated with the user.id.

But what about historical data that referenced the address? If you move
today, I still want to know where I shipped last week's orders.

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

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tony Caduto 2006-11-27 22:17:34 Re: fatal error on 8.1 server
Previous Message Ron Mayer 2006-11-27 22:10:08 Re: Unexpected sort order (suspected bug)