Re: Separate PK in Jxn Tbl?

From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 17:59:59 -0400
Message-ID: <4797b8e2$0$4073$9a566e8b_at_news.aliant.net>

David Cressey wrote:

> "Tony Toews [MVP]" <ttoews_at_telusplanet.net> wrote in message
> news:ii6dp3tc3l2u8m4nv6c8ipg8ejgjggu5oe_at_4ax.com...
>

>>"Neil" <nospam_at_nospam.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>However, I just came across some code in which the person created a

>
> junction
>

>>>table with a separate PK consisting of an autonumber field, and then the

>
> two
>

>>>fields.
>>>
>>>So I was wondering how others did junction tables -- with a standalone
>>>autonumber PK, or with a PK consisting of the PKs of the tables being
>>>joined? And, if a standalone PK, then why?
>>
>>I always use an autonumber PK and a uniqui index set on the two FK fields.
>>
>>Why?   No particular good reason.  One of my database rules is that all

>
> tables have
>

>>an autonumber primary key.   It's also slightly easier to delete the

>
> record in code.
>

>>Now if I was to have a child table from the junction table then I would

>
> absolutely
>

>>use a autonumber primary key for ease of use when designing queries, forms

>
> and
>

>>reports.
>>
>>The theorists will argue.  I don't care.

>
> Sometimes, theory IS practical. (Some would say always). A pragmatic person
> would at least listen to the arguments of theorists before dismissing them.

The theorists won't argue. The theorists will simply point out the inherent stupidity of abdicating thought for simplistic recipes. The invincibly ignorant won't care. They never do. Received on Wed Jan 23 2008 - 22:59:59 CET