Message-Id: <25937.338118@fatcity.com>
From: "Jacques Kilchoer" <Jacques.Kilchoer@quest.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 12:42:12 -0700
Subject: RE: Find the table's name that using sequences

If you are using the sequence to generate the primary key for a table, then the sequence should only be used for that table. I can't think of a pro to have one sequence shared for the primary keys on many different tables.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ml-errors@fatcity.com [mailto:ml-errors@fatcity.com]On Behalf Of
> Chris Grabowy
> 
> Well, there could be business logic reasons as to why you 
> would have one
> sequence per table.
>  
> Also, I don't know if I would ever go with one sequence for 
> many tables,
> sounds like a bottle neck to me.  And how would one sequence 
> for many tables
> impact scalability??  Or having lots of users hammering the 
> database??  And
> what happens if you have to reset the sequence, then you have 
> to check the
> primary key values on many tables.  One sequence to one table 
> sounds good to
> me, but I would love to hear pros/cons about this...