On 15 Apr 2007, fuzzy.greybeard_at_gmail.com wrote:
> On Apr 15, 8:28 am, Galen Boyer <galen_bo..._at_yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 15 Apr 2007, sybra..._at_hccnet.nl wrote:
>> > On 15 Apr 2007 01:12:05 -0700, "howa" <howac..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >>On 4??15??, ?U??12??04??, "Fuzzy" <fuzzy.greybe..._at_gmail.com>
>> >>wrote:
>> >>> On Apr 14, 7:27 am, "howa" <howac..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >>> > Seems AUTO_INCREMENT is very handy and natural, anyone agree?
>>
>> >>> Seems SEQUENCE is very handy and natural. Why don't others
>> >>> implement SEQUENCE?
>>
>> >>> /Hans
>>
>> >>I can't agree SEQUENCE is more handy than AUTO_INCREMENT as you
>> >>need to do the same thing by two statements.
>>
>> >>Also, in real world, use of AUTO_INCREMENT as primary key (e.g. id)
>> >>is in fact, quite intuitive.
>>
>> > My, my, typing two statements instead of one! What a problem!
>>
>> Using them in practice is not even close to just typing two
>> statements or do your users actually log into SQLPlus and type "two
>> statements". You either have to create a trigger that assigns the
>> next PK using a sequence or, in every single insert you have to
>> reference the sequence.nextval function call. Ease of implementation
>> is not an argument for sequences, at all.
>>
>>
>>
>> > SEQUENCE is quite handy, as it is allows for multiple, similar
>> > tables with ONE surrogate.
>>
>> This is my # 1 reason sequences win this argument.
>>
>> > Also, in real world, AUTO_INCREMENT is equally artificial as
>> > SEQUENCE.
>>
>> > But if you want to stick to Mickeysoft products, and don't want to
>> > admit the Oracle solution is better, you are by all means invited
>> > to do so.
>>
>> What Oracle should do is extend the sequence and provide an
>> AUTO-INCREMENT feature using them. Until they do, the fact that in
>> the definition of the table can be used to define how the PK gets its
>> surrogate value is point blank, easier to implement because it is
>> less coding, and this coming from a guy who hates the limitations of
>> the AUTO-INCREMENT from Sybase and SQLServer.
>>
>> --
>> Galen Boyer
>
>
> I have to admit that I'd like to see Oracle provide a declarative way
> to link SEQUENCE to a column. Best of both worlds.
>
> Then again, I'd really like to see a lot more delarative stuff in
> Oracle: declare the domain for a column to be in table X column Y is
> another example.
I agree somewhat, but not the context the statement seems to be in.
Oracle has tons of "declarative stuff" and I think they are great at it.
--
Galen Boyer
Received on Thu Apr 19 2007 - 23:05:01 CDT
