Re: Surrogate keys (Was: enums)

From: Michael Glaesemann <grzm(at)myrealbox(dot)com>
To: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>
Cc: mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc, "Pollard, Mike" <mpollard(at)cincom(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Surrogate keys (Was: enums)
Date: 2006-01-20 02:41:36
Message-ID: DE40DFC6-017E-4E79-9FFE-8D29C5F24C67@myrealbox.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


On Jan 20, 2006, at 10:50 , Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:

>> Yes. Representation of the DNA is probably best. But - that's a
>> lot of
>> data to use as a key in multiple tables. :-)
>
> No then you have problems with identical twins :)

And, looking forward, clones.

Michael Glaesemann
grzm myrealbox com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message John 2006-01-20 03:55:17 Questions about varlist and Query
Previous Message Jeremy Drake 2006-01-20 01:55:42 Re: No heap lookups on index