Re: Surrogate/Identies for all keys

From: Todd Taylor <nospam.taylor.todd_at_home.nospam.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 20:46:44 GMT
Message-ID: <UGYg6.255228$iy3.56616570_at_news1.rdc1.tn.home.com>


JRStern wrote in message <3a81996a.9264091_at_news.gte.net>...
>I went to a presentation the other day, the speaker suggested she
>always uses surrogate/integer/identity keys -- always!
>
>This seems to be an *increasingly* common practice, with some
>variations using UIDs or other non-significant surrogates.
>
>I know Joe Celko disapproves, and I find myself in complete agreement
>with what I've read from him on this subject. But, are we a couple of
>old fogies, when all the kids are using surrogate/identities all the
>time?
>
>PS -- I know all of the technical arguments pro and con, I'm really
>asking more for a show of hands as to who does what, and secondarily
>about the sociology of the choice.
>
>Joshua Stern
>JRStern_at_gte.net
>

I have to agree with the speaker on this one. I also ALWAYS use surrogate keys. I can't think of any reason why not to, although if someone can come up with a good counter argument, I'll consider it.

Most of the time when I see other people not using a suurogate and question them about it, I get the "because I didn't feel like going through the trouble" argument. To me, you can't afford to NOT go through the trouble, even if it is a "quick and dirty" job. I can't tell you how many of those I have seen become corporate standard apps and now you're toast when they want to enhance it a little.

Todd Taylor
ProActive Technology, LLC Received on Fri Feb 09 2001 - 21:46:44 CET

Original text of this message