Re: Surrogate Keys: an Implementation Issue

Paul Mansour wrote:
> paul c wrote:
> ...
> Well, clearly, the DBMS must do the generating of auto-incremented
> values. But I'm not sure we are talking about the same thing here. When
> I say "track a row over time", I'm talking about being able to, for
> example, report on the fact that a row went through the following
> history:
>
> Name (pk) City
> ===== ======
> Palu New York // Lastweek
> Palu New Jersey // yesterday
> Paul New Jersey // today
>
> Since my primary key has changed, I need some immutable identifier so I
> know these are in fact part of the same set.
>
> Not sure how a timestamp helps here.
>

'Lastweek', 'yesterday', 'today' look like timestamps to me!

p Received on Thu Jul 20 2006 - 19:32:23 CEST