Re: Negative Numbers in "Identity" or" Autonumber" fields
From: David Cressey <cressey73_at_verizon.net>
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2007 13:06:24 GMT
Message-ID: <k%QLh.11339$el3.5213_at_trndny01>
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2007 13:06:24 GMT
Message-ID: <k%QLh.11339$el3.5213_at_trndny01>
"-CELKO-" <jcelko212_at_earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1174352980.559694.313280_at_n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> >> Any thought's on using negative numbers as surrogate primary keys? <<
>
> Since surrogatres are never seen by the users by definition, they
> could be anything -- positive or negative, or additive congruence
> sequences or has code or etc. The question would be in implementation
> -- does the particular SQL engine favor a sequence or a randomly
> distributed value for performance min whatever access method it is
> using?
>
Whose definition? Received on Tue Mar 20 2007 - 14:06:24 CET