Re: Surrogate primary key plus unique constraint vs. natural primary key: data integrity?
From: Cimode <cimode_at_hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 08:16:54 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <0ca4f864-3636-4bec-b4eb-ceef6d0aea42_at_bs5g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 08:16:54 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <0ca4f864-3636-4bec-b4eb-ceef6d0aea42_at_bs5g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>
> And that's probably why my professor had told us to use natural
> (composite) keys by default; because then you *have to* think about
> *proper* unification *and* such integrity issues as the one with the
> overlapping foreign keys are much less likely to remain unnoticed.
Unique identification is EOI specific which makes defining *default*
type of identifier at best a moot concept, at worst a subjective
choice.
IMHO Regards, Received on Tue Mar 19 2013 - 16:16:54 CET