question ???

Dave,

belter of an explanation - I sit corrected. Thanks.

Norman.

Norman Dunbar			EMail:	Norman.Dunbar_at_LFS.co.uk
Database/Unix administrator	Phone:	0113 289 6265
				Fax:	0113 289 3146
Lynx Financial Systems Ltd.	URL:	http://www.Lynx-FS.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Wotton [mailto:Dave.Wotton_at_dwotton.nospam.clara.co.uk] Posted At: Thursday, September 27, 2001 6:54 PM Posted To: server
Conversation: question ???
Subject: Re: question ???

"Norman Dunbar" <Norman.Dunbar_at_lfs.co.uk> wrote in message news:A43AA78C3F9DD511AAB100805FBE740D45507F_at_lnewton.leeds.lfs.co.uk...

[snip]

> But this produces a 'meaningless' primary key value wheras the table
> should (really) have a more meaningfule one based upon the data in
said
> table. (Or so I'm told by Data Designers)

Actually, the reverse is true.

There is a page at:

   http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/~sgomori/570/rdbdesign.html

(Steve Gomori, lecturer at Ohio State University)

which explains database normalisation very clearly (and also provides a link to Codd's 12 rules of database design). This page says the following about creating primary keys: <SNIP> Received on Fri Sep 28 2001 - 03:06:59 CDT