Re: Natural keys vs Aritficial Keys
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 2009 08:03:28 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <0d7c9582-7194-4f45-9e85-5fd13f5b0748_at_s31g2000yqs.googlegroups.com>
On Jul 3, 3:19 am, "Walter Mitty" <wami..._at_verizon.net> wrote:
> "Roy Hann" <specia..._at_processed.almost.meat> wrote in message
>
> news:982dnVavb_XQM9DXnZ2dnUVZ8oGdnZ2d_at_pipex.net...
>
> > 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).
>
> This is an enormously important point, one that gets overlooked time and
> time again in the discussion of databases.
Oh, I think I understand the point now. Indentical duplicates are preferable to spuriously distinct rows. With identical duplicates, you know you have duplicate data, and it stays that way. With spuriously distinct rows, you may not become aware of their spurious nature without non-trivial scrutiny.
Correct? Received on Mon Jul 06 2009 - 17:03:28 CEST