Re: Avoiding surrogate keys

From: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Lew <noone(at)lwsc(dot)ehost-services(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Avoiding surrogate keys
Date: 2010-05-01 18:50:43
Message-ID: r2pb42b73151005011150me8412577y2b76e48a73f7589a@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 12:09 PM, Lew <noone(at)lwsc(dot)ehost-services(dot)com> wrote:
> Philippe Lang wrote:
>>
>> I think nobody mentioned Object-Relational mappers.
>> If you intend to used one (or think you may be using one in the future),
>> using surrogate keys is more straightforward, if not necessary.
>
> Neither of those claims is even slightly true.  Using Hibernate, EclipseLink
> or OpenJPA (for Java applications), natural keys are sufficient and far more
> straightforward than surrogate keys.

right -- to be fair though is quite a bit of (generally bad) software
out there that assumes or at least heavily encourages surrogate keys.

merlin

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Scott Marlowe 2010-05-01 19:08:12 Re: PostgreSQL vs. Microsoft SQL server
Previous Message Thomas Løcke 2010-05-01 18:47:38 PostgreSQL vs. Microsoft SQL server