Re: Guidelines to a decent support of surrogate key implementation

"Cimode" <cimode_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message news:1179993531.222375.136310_at_o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> Lately, I have brought emphasis on the subject of concatenated keys vs
> addition of column. I have noticed then that the thread quickly
> turned to a debate about the failure of current dbms's to bring a
> decent support of surrogate key implementation. From what I observe 3
> line of thoughts trends appear:
>
> LINE1> People who think that surrogate key should be an internal
> physical mechanism to the dbms and invisible to designer who could
> focus on the logical selection of primary keys

There is something fundamental that I do not understand about LINE1, namely,

In the context of internal physical mechanisms, why is a surrogate key of more value than an internal row address? Received on Thu May 24 2007 - 12:58:48 CEST