Re: Separate PK in Jxn Tbl?

"Brian Selzer" <brian_at_selzer-software.com> wrote in news:l1Rlj.2866$nK5.2329_at_nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com:

> 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. A clear
> understanding of how and when they can be used and why is critical or
> you run the risk of a corrupt database.

We often follow certain practices which we may describe as rules. These customs may simplify our work, or contribute to its success. Tony is a very experienced Access developer; readers of Comp Databases Ms-  have benefited from his sharing that experience, sometimes in encapsulated form, as when he describes a usual, customary, or generalized course of action or behaviour as a rule.

I follow the same rule. Having an auto-number primary key in each table simplifies the establishment of relationships among tables. In Access, the primary key auto-number ensures that forms bound to the table will be editable, although any unique non-null index will serve that purpose. In scripts using ADO, the primary key auto-number provides an identifier for update and delete actions.

Could you cite instances of databases typically used with Access that have been corrupted by auto-number primary keys? Received on Thu Jan 24 2008 - 03:01:16 CET