Re: SQL Humor

It's even worse if they're used in PK/FK relationships--in other words, spread throughout the database. Another argument against natural primary keys.... On the other hand, I really shouldn't complain: as a consultant, I will be raking in the dough when the change finally happens. Maybe that's why Joe Celko's so set against artificial keys :)

<rchrismon_at_patmedia.net> wrote in message news:1124417251.154623.200490_at_o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Hope you don't mind, but I have some fuzzy thoughts on datatypes, smart
> decisions, column lengths, and maybe the ghost of Y2K. How many DBAs
> use number datatypes to hold Social Security Numbers? How many use
> varchar(9) or char(9)? I always use the latter because the guru once
> told me never to use a numeric datatype if I wasn't going to do the
> math. Now, I wonder. There are about 270,000,000 people in the US of A,
> each with their own unique SSN. Say another 50,000,000 to 100,000,000
> IDs are already accounted for for one reason or another. 10 to the 9th
> is only 1 billion, so nearly half the possible SSNs are used up
> already. Folks, I'm closer to retirement age than whipper-snapper age
> but I believe I could live to see us run out of SSNs unless the Feds do
> something DRASTIC, like add a digit. Then what are we going to do?
> Those who ignored the guru are probably sitting pretty. A BIGINT has
> plenty of room to grow. All those char and varchar tables, however, are
> going to need rewriting. Doesn't that sound familiar?
>
Received on Fri Aug 19 2005 - 04:49:20 CEST