On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 11:17 AM, Charles Wilt <charles.wilt@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Natural vs surrogate (vs artificial [see
http://www.informationweek.com/software/information-management/celko-on-sql-natural-artificial-and-surrogate-keys-explained/d/d-id/1059246?
])

is pretty much a religious war :)

I should have waited for your post before rambling on!

I agree that artificial keys for this particular use case (the
"association tables" as you called them) are especially pointless,
even if they confer advantages in other use cases.

But I'll admit there is some value to just "sticking with the
standard", even when that isn't optimal in some academic sense. If
the shop has an always-use-artificial-keys-for-everything policy, then
the disruption of omitting those keys for a few tables may not be
worth the savings. I don't think the superfluous keys are *actively
harmful* enough to make an exception to the shop standard.

John Y.

This thread ...

Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2019 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].