Re: Surrogate keys (Was: enums)

From: Leandro Guimarães Faria Corcete DUTRA <leandro(at)dutra(dot)fastmail(dot)fm>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Surrogate keys (Was: enums)
Date: 2006-01-18 13:11:44
Message-ID: loom.20060118T141047-101@post.gmane.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Greg Stark <gsstark <at> mit.edu> writes:

> I hate knee-jerk reactions too, but just think of all the pain of people
> dealing with databases where they used Social Security numbers for primary
> keys. I would never use an attribute that represents some real-world datum as
> a primary key any more.

I am not familiar with the situation.

> In my experience there are very few occasions where I want a real non-sequence
> generated primary key. I've never regretted having a sequence generated
> primary key, and I've certainly had occasions to regret not having one.

http://blogs.ittoolbox.com/database/soup/archives/007327.asp?rss=1

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Leandro Guimarães Faria Corcete DUTRA 2006-01-18 13:24:36 Re: enums
Previous Message Leandro Guimarães Faria Corcete DUTRA 2006-01-18 13:08:53 Re: Surrogate keys (Was: enums)