Re: Surrogate Keys: an Implementation Issue
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2006 03:09:49 GMT
Brian Selzer wrote:
> "paul c" <toledobythesea_at_oohay.ac> wrote in message
>> Brian Selzer wrote: >>> "Bob Badour" <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca> wrote in message >>> news:e43yg.27359$pu3.361813_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca... >>>> JOG wrote: >>>> >>>>> J M Davitt wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> [big snip] >>> ... >>> How much work have you done in the field? This comment makes you sound >>> like a neophyte. >>> ... >> Is this changing the subject? >>
> I don't think so. He obviously doesn't have a clue about the problems with
> key volatility. In fact, it appears from his other comments that he doesn't
> understand the fundamental concepts of the Relational Model.
By the Information Principle (if keys have values), 'key volatility' must be value volatility, which is a non-sequitur, as the joke goes about 'military intelligence' (at the moment, I forget the common term for this contradiction, sorry).
As far as "He" goes, the subject is certainly being changed, not to my agreement!
p Received on Fri Jul 28 2006 - 05:09:49 CEST