Re: identity columns

From: John <ru_re_re_move_zel_at_ecl_re_re_move_ipse.net>
Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2002 14:51:14 -0500
Message-ID: <ON1_7.421$pD6.382720131@news.netcarrier.net>

> First, I would name the table "Personnel" and not "Employee"
I'm not going into naming arguments - except to say I usually name tables in the singular - probably because I've seen it done that way a lot <s>
"Personnel" might make more sense - I just didn't think of it.

>Next, I assume that you have a business rule that says
> everyone gets a company assigned email address when we hire them.
Actually - we don't. The system is designed to let our customers employees purchase from us. I can't always require that I get an email address from our
customers that I can load into my database.

However - let's assume I *could* get an email address for each and every employee.
This is the heart of my question - if I use email address - and then that email address
changes (as they sometimes do) then I'm stuck with foreign keys all over the database
that I have to change. Does that make sense? I can see your argument against
the datatype IDENTITY - but I don't see the absolute need to elimonate artificial
keys in *every* case. Received on Sun Jan 06 2002 - 13:51:14 CST