Re: Separate PK in Jxn Tbl?

"Brian Selzer" <brian_at_selzer-software.com> wrote:

>>>Only an idiot would have a rule for no particularly good reason. Only an
>>>imbecile would follow such a rule. A strong argument can be made for
>>>using
>>>autonumber primary keys--especially if the target DBMS doesn't support FOR
>>>EACH ROW triggers--but to just blythely add them for no particularly good
>>>reason is a recipe for disaster.
>>
>> My reasons are, in my opinion, good reasons. Not great but good. You
>> don't like
>> them? Tough.
>>
>
>So now they're good reasons? In your earlier post, you said they weren't
>good reasons. Can't you make up your mind? You also haven't stated your
>reasons. How can I like them or not like them? I don't know them!

They are good reasons for me and, in my opinion, for many or all other users of Access. I flippantly stated "no particular good reason" as I was thinking about some of the regulars in the comp.databases.theor newsgroup and what I assumed would be there viewpoint.

>I was not speaking of corruption due to disk failures; I was instead
>referring to permitting garbage into the database due to the misuse of
>auto-number primary keys.

Ok, not quite sure what you mean by this. Presumably because a unique index wasn't declared on other fields such as, for a parts table, a part number. Which can be duplicated by multiple manufacturers so even there that's not quite a good example.

Tony

-- 
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
   Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can 
read the entire thread of messages.
   Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at 
http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm
   Tony's Microsoft Access Blog - http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/