Re: Primary Key Theory Question
From: Mike Sherrill <MSherrillnonono_at_compuserve.com>
Date: Sat, 03 Apr 2004 08:27:28 -0500
Message-ID: <l1fq60h3q0puk064v0pvjmafs3rdb7hnvi_at_4ax.com>
Date: Sat, 03 Apr 2004 08:27:28 -0500
Message-ID: <l1fq60h3q0puk064v0pvjmafs3rdb7hnvi_at_4ax.com>
On Thu, 1 Apr 2004 15:47:40 +0200, "ben brugman" <ben_at_niethier.nl>
wrote:
>> In my experience, a surrogate key takes the place of a candidate key,
I think you do understand it. If you start with this kind of table:
Full_Name
>> and an artificial key isn't a key. An artificial key might uniquely
>> identify a row, but it doesn't uniquely identify what the row
>> represents.
>>
>I do not really understand what you are writing.
>
>If an artificial key uniquely identifies a row but not what the row
>represents, the row does neither uniquely identify what the
>row represents. This is what I read and do not understand.
--
Sherrill, Mike
Sherrill, Mike
Since it takes the place of a key, I'd call it a surrogate.
-- Mike Sherrill Information Management SystemsReceived on Sat Apr 03 2004 - 15:27:28 CEST