Re: Oracle Sequences

"Ed prochak" <ed.prochak_at_magicinterface.com> wrote in message news:4b5394b2.0401161145.45c5b364_at_posting.google.com...
> Galen Boyer <galenboyer_at_hotpop.com> wrote in message
news:<u8yk8t0mk.fsf_at_standardandpoors.com>...
> > On Fri, 16 Jan 2004, jrajan_at_nc.rr.com wrote:
> >
> > > Due to the nature of our work skipping sequences is not a good
> > > practice.
> >
> > There has never been a sound argument yet for this. If you
> > actually understand some trait of your ids and use it in your
> > efforts you have intelligence in your keys. That is a big
> > no-no.
>
> Well, never say "never".
>
> Some financial applications require no numeric gaps, for example
> invoice numbering. Auditors hate gaps.
>
> The downside is loss of scalability since you are essentially forced
> to have a gating process to "single source" the numbers, whether they
> are generated from a SEQUENCE or by SELECT MAX(thenumberkey). It's a
> pain but sometimes has to be done.

You are right, Ed, these are normal requirements from accountants. On the one hand you can correctly argue that these requirements are wrong, because non-missing numbers don't prove anything. On the other hand, these requirements usually stem from manual procedures where it is easy to correct errors (without a trace usually) so as to keep the numbering sequential. If that is the case (i.e. automating a manual procedure), performance probably will not be an issue; automating the process will not cause the number of invoices sent to increase from one per hour to one per millisecond :-). That would be expecting to much from IT!

rob van lopik

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.558 / Virus Database: 350 - Release Date: 3-1-2004