Welcome To The Home Of The Visual FoxPro Experts  
home. signup. forum. archives. search. google. articles. downloads. faq. members. weblogs. sponsors. rss.
 From: Andy Kramek
  Where is Andy Kramek?
 Westminster Circle, Akron
 Ohio - United States
 Andy Kramek
 To: Mike Yearwood
  Where is Mike Yearwood?
 Toronto
 Canada
 Mike Yearwood
 Tags
Subject: RE: The "Rule" for Primary Key Fields
Thread ID: 115198 Message ID: 119196 # Views: 45 # Ratings: 1
Version: Not Applicable Category: General VFP Topics
Date: Saturday, January 20, 2007 7:12:23 PM         
   


>> Disk space is so cheap I suggest you consider the GUID. That way if you have to combine branch offices into a single table, there will be no worries about conflicting integer values. :)

Just to add my $0.02 worth here. GUIDs are generally a lousy choice for primary keys for a number of reasons:

[1] The requirement for a primary key is that it be "Unique Within a Table". A GUID is (for the next few billion years at least) unique universally. So a GUID exceeds the requirements for a primary key and is bound by rules that have nothing to do with primary keys

[2] The primary reason for using a surrogate primary key is to simplify Joins and speed up processing. Long character strings are NOT an efficient way of doing either - integers are much better for this purpose (which is why all serious database use them)

[3] If you need to merge data I absolutely agree that GUID is the solution - but NOT as the primary key of either the source, or the merged table for the reasons given at [1] and [2] above. The only function of the GUID in a merged table is to be able to identify the source - and the GUID alone (whether it is the PPK or not) is not sufficient for that - you still need to know which source table to look into!

As I say - just my $0.02 worth but this approach has worked for me in all the databases I have ever used (VFP, SQL Server, Oracle, DB2, Informix, Ingres and even in mass-storage systems like TerraData )

Regards
Andy Kramek
Microsoft MVP (Visual FoxPro)
Tightline Computers Inc, Akron Ohio, USA



COMPLETE THREAD
The "Rule" for Primary Key Fields Posted by Ken Murphy @ 12/6/2006 12:53:31 AM
RE: The "Rule" for Primary Key Fields Posted by Boudewijn Lutgerink @ 12/6/2006 8:32:13 AM
RE: The "Rule" for Primary Key Fields Posted by Ken Murphy @ 12/6/2006 2:11:55 PM
RE: The "Rule" for Primary Key Fields Posted by Borislav Borissov @ 12/6/2006 8:40:47 AM
RE: The "Rule" for Primary Key Fields Posted by Eric den Doop @ 12/6/2006 9:21:26 AM
RE: The "Rule" for Primary Key Fields Posted by Ken Murphy @ 12/6/2006 2:16:15 PM
RE: The "Rule" for Primary Key Fields Posted by sudhir uppal @ 1/12/2007 5:57:59 AM
RE: The "Rule" for Primary Key Fields Posted by William Sanders @ 1/12/2007 6:11:22 PM
RE: The "Rule" for Primary Key Fields Posted by Ken Murphy @ 1/12/2007 11:33:51 PM
RE: The "Rule" for Primary Key Fields Posted by Jamie Osborn @ 1/13/2007 2:05:07 AM
RE: The "Rule" for Primary Key Fields Posted by Ken Murphy @ 1/13/2007 2:20:51 AM
RE: The "Rule" for Primary Key Fields Posted by William Sanders @ 1/16/2007 9:49:00 PM
RE: The "Rule" for Primary Key Fields Posted by Ken Murphy @ 1/16/2007 10:25:38 PM
RE: The "Rule" for Primary Key Fields Posted by William Sanders @ 1/16/2007 10:25:30 PM
RE: The "Rule" for Primary Key Fields Posted by Terry Thurber @ 1/15/2007 12:41:55 AM
RE: The "Rule" for Primary Key Fields Posted by William Sanders @ 1/16/2007 9:50:14 PM
RE: The "Rule" for Primary Key Fields Posted by Terry Thurber @ 1/17/2007 7:17:35 AM
RE: The "Rule" for Primary Key Fields Posted by William Sanders @ 1/16/2007 9:58:37 PM
RE: The "Rule" for Primary Key Fields Posted by Terry Thurber @ 1/17/2007 7:44:55 AM
RE: The "Rule" for Primary Key Fields Posted by Eric den Doop @ 1/16/2007 10:56:36 PM
RE: The "Rule" for Primary Key Fields Posted by William Sanders @ 1/16/2007 11:20:56 PM
RE: The "Rule" for Primary Key Fields Posted by Terry Thurber @ 1/15/2007 1:29:36 AM
RE: The "Rule" for Primary Key Fields Posted by Ken Murphy @ 1/15/2007 9:56:37 PM
RE: The "Rule" for Primary Key Fields Posted by Mike Yearwood @ 1/18/2007 12:29:44 PM
RE: The "Rule" for Primary Key Fields Posted by Ken Murphy @ 1/18/2007 1:37:31 PM
RE: The "Rule" for Primary Key Fields Posted by Mike Yearwood @ 1/19/2007 1:58:58 AM
RE: The "Rule" for Primary Key Fields Posted by Ken Murphy @ 1/19/2007 3:41:03 PM
RE: The "Rule" for Primary Key Fields Posted by Andy Kramek @ 1/20/2007 7:12:23 PM
RE: The "Rule" for Primary Key Fields Posted by Mike Yearwood @ 1/20/2007 8:05:23 PM
RE: The "Rule" for Primary Key Fields Posted by Andy Kramek @ 1/20/2007 10:32:40 PM
RE: The "Rule" for Primary Key Fields Posted by Mike Yearwood @ 1/21/2007 4:40:22 PM
RE: The "Rule" for Primary Key Fields Posted by Andy Kramek @ 1/21/2007 7:13:22 PM
RE: The "Rule" for Primary Key Fields Posted by tushar @ 1/22/2007 6:02:17 AM
RE: The "Rule" for Primary Key Fields Posted by Andy Kramek @ 1/22/2007 12:15:08 PM
RE: The "Rule" for Primary Key Fields Posted by tushar @ 1/23/2007 8:26:36 AM