Re: Database design question

scotch_at_yahoo.com (scotch) wrote in <38725CE3.D866C314_at_yahoo.com>:

>There are fields within various tables which establish "relationships"
>based upon data within different columns in other tables -- not
>established by keys, and updated by triggers contantanating data and
>using sequences.

welcome to relational databases. that's how things are supposed to work. the keys are for expressing certain kinds of fixed relationships, but any pair of attributes can be used to express (reasonable or nonsensical) transitory relationships. so don't worry.

>
>Example: Table one has, say, an owner column which would have data
>within it, and based upon that data, it would have a "quasi -
>relationship" to a different column in another table.
> [. . .]
>column. The Primary Key Data for these tables would then need to match
>as well.

you don't have to use both sequenced PK's and real-world-valued actual keys. you use PK to assert the fixed connection between table rows. you use AK to explore more casual connections. mix and match, if you want.

>
>These columns are updated by triggers which concatanate data and use
>sequences, which are cached.which This seems to me like it could cause
>trouble down the road if there are rollbacks, imports etc..

oracle practices safe db-sex, so you can join and insert, then rollback and share a smoke. no committments required.

-- 
dave mausner