Re: Natural keys vs Aritficial Keys

From: Roy Hann <specially_at_processed.almost.meat>
Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2009 02:07:57 -0500
Message-ID: <>

lawpoop wrote:

> On May 16, 2:45 pm, Roy Hann <specia..._at_processed.almost.meat> wrote:
>> There's no two ways about it.  If the row would be duplicated if not for
>> the spurious distinction of a value that was generated only to ensure
>> distinction and *for no other reason*, it's logically still a duplicate
>> row.
>> By itself a duplicate is absurd but pretty harmless. The problem is
>> when one copy gets updated.
> Forgive my naivete, but how does one copy of a duplicate row get
> updated? How does one express that update in SQL, referring to one row
> but not both?
> Thank you for disabusing me of my ignorance :)

My point is that the rows are logically duplicate but they have been rendered spuriously distinct by tacking on a meaningless but unique attribute. So such an update is easy (perhaps inevitable).

Received on Fri Jul 03 2009 - 09:07:57 CEST

Original text of this message