Re: Sequence Numbers as Primary Keys
Date: 1995/09/28
Message-ID: <44ee5v$nks_at_ixnews2.ix.netcom.com>#1/1
> <CUT>
>> The DBA group refuses to use sequence numbers claiming that they are not "business
>> data" and do not belong in the database.
<CUT>
>> Joel Hagans
>> jhagans_at_telerama.lm.com
>
>The use of "surrogate" keys is a rather well known concept in relational theory.
>We use a sequence number as our primary key. It works fine. Saying that the data is not
>business data is pretty lame. Perhaps your DBA's should
>read "Designing Quality Databases ..." by Thomas A. Bruce.
> parris geiser
>
Agree with this. Using a system generated unique key as an alternative to a large composite key is actually quite common.
If your DBAs are reluctant on this tell them its no different then performing careful denormalization from the logical design in order to enhance performance of the database. And if they won't do this either due to differences from the business data, Oracle and other groups have some nice classes in this.
I have been a DBA as well as a C++ and other developer. I have never balked at system generated keys in place of composite keys. Now collapsing six tables in order to make a query easier on the other hand....
Shelley Received on Thu Sep 28 1995 - 00:00:00 CET