Re: Surrogate Keys As Part Of Composite Keys?
From: Joe \ <joe_at_bftsi0.UUCP>
Date: 2000/03/27
Message-ID: <sdvknh63lul18_at_corp.supernews.com>#1/1
Date: 2000/03/27
Message-ID: <sdvknh63lul18_at_corp.supernews.com>#1/1
"Randy Yates" <qusraya_at_rtp.ericsson.com> wrote in message news:38DFCA18.26F1128_at_rtp.ericsson.com...
> You haven't answered my question. My question is: why *not* do it
> with a surrogate key? I've known for a week and agree that the method
> above is the proper way to model the table, but I'm missing the theory
> and corresponding insight on *why* I need to do it this way.
Because it causes purists to rant and rave and foam at the mouth?
-- Joe Foster <mailto:jfoster_at_ricochet.net> Space Cooties! <http://www.xenu.net/> WARNING: I cannot be held responsible for the above They're coming to because my cats have apparently learned to type. take me away, ha ha!Received on Mon Mar 27 2000 - 00:00:00 CEST