Re: re-numbering pimary-key

User wants to be neat

>
>
> Why? is there a business reason, or do you just prefer to be neat?
>

Disable them? Don't you mean drop them and then rebuild them afterwards? How can they be disabled?

>
>
> Let's see you either disable all foreign key constraints involved
> while doing this or dump your data to files or temp tables, empty your
> target tables and reload, forcing the primary and foreign key values
> to be what you want.
>
>
>

yes, what am I thinking .....

>
> Why the two-phase approach? (12->98->4) why not just renumber lowest
> to highest? there is no overlap involved, just do one PK then all it's
> child FKs. It's a simple algorithm.
>

There are only 80 records in the table, but the numbering is up to 1046.

>
> Be I really cannot emphasize enough that you DON'T NEED to do this,
> unless there is a real business reason.
>

Ok next time ...

>
> and a final comment: This really should be posted in
> comp.databases.oracle.misc
>
> the comp.databases.oracle group is outdated and being phased out.
>
> HTH,
> Ed Prochak
>
> -- there are no stupid questions.
Received on Tue Dec 16 2003 - 20:44:00 CET