[AccessD] "Faked" replication

Gustav, that's my impression -- they're overkill unless, like the article
states, you have some other need. I've not actually worked with GUID's in a
development situation, but everything says they definitely slow things down.

Susan H.


> Hi Charlotte
>
> > Um ... I'm lost in the woods.  My understanding was that Access did
> > recommend GUIDs.  I've never seen anything from them discouraging their
> > use.  They are a PITA to work with, which is discouraging enough on its
> > own.  Now I can't figure out who's recommending what??
>
> I don't know either. But based on Susan's article and common sense I
> think you can conclude, that if a normal (Long) Autonumber will do,
> stick with this; if not - which clearly is the case for the original
> question of Steve(n), use a GUID. Using GUID is what Access does all
> by itself when set up for replication.
>
> /gustav
>
>
> > Yes -- OK, now I understand the confusion. Thanks! ;) I thought YOU were
> > saying that MS DID recommend using the GUID's as primary keys. :)
>
> >> By second (forth?) read I now understand:
> >>
> >> >> Microsoft discourages the use of GUID as a primary key, but that's
> >> >> because most people don't really need universal uniqueness. When
> >> >> uniqueness across many systems is vital, however, the GUID datatype
>
> >> >> is definitely the way to go. Just remember that you pay a price in
> >> >> performance.
> >>
> >> I read this HOLE paragraph as one statement from MS. But it is only
> >> the first sentence ... the remaining part of the paragraph is YOUR
> >> opinion, right? Sorry.
>
> _______________________________________________
> AccessD mailing list
> AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
> Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>