[AccessD] Autonumber Assigned Immediately

You miss the point.  Autonumber 6 doesn't change but the data in the row
does.  My point was that Autonumber 6 doesn't identify the data in any
way, merely the row that the data happens to be stored in.  I'm not
opposed to autonumbers, I use them all the time.  What I'm opposed to is
trying to turn the autonumber into a meaningful value.

Charlotte Foust


-----Original Message-----
From: Reuben Cummings [mailto:reuben at gfconsultants.com] 
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 9:25 AM
To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving
Subject: Re: [AccessD] Autonumber Assigned Immediately


You're correct Charlotte, but I've also NEVER seen a case where
autonumber 6, for example, changed which row of data it is connected to.
It always ID's the same row for life.  I have never agreed to the
statement that the data is separate from the autonumber - they ARE in
the same row.

IMO, the autonumber field is simply a way to create sequential numbering
without writing a bunch code to do so.  The fact that it can also be the
Primary Key is just an added benefit.  Why include two completely unique
numbers in a row if one will do two jobs?  I'm a big fan of simplicity.

This will lead to a ridiculous discussion - again - so I agree to
disagree
;)

BTW, Charlotte, because I have never driven a nail with a screwdriver
that method of driving nails is, in fact, NOT a valid method.  :)  I'll
let the list know if I ever do.  However, an adjustable wrench is
acceptable.

Reuben Cummings
GFC, LLC
812.523.1017


> -----Original Message-----
> From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
> [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com]On Behalf Of Charlotte 
> Foust
> Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 11:04 AM
> To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving
> Subject: Re: [AccessD] Autonumber Assigned Immediately
>
>
> No, it is a row identifier and therefore always points to the same 
> row, period.  The data in that row are entirely independent from the 
> autonumber, which is what leads to all the intense discussions of 
> "primay key" vs "unique key" vs "surrogate key", etc.  The fact that 
> you have used it this way doesn't make it any more valid a usage.  
> After all, you can drive nails with a screwdriver too. ;->
>
> Charlotte Foust
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Reuben Cummings [mailto:reuben at gfconsultants.com]
> Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 8:46 AM
> To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving
> Subject: Re: [AccessD] Autonumber Assigned Immediately
>
>
> I don't know why everyone is so adamant about no showing an 
> autonumber. I agree technically they shouldn't be shown.
>
> But sometimes a simple solution is the best.  For example, we 
> currently have some contracts to 'digitize' a state required form for 
> several local counties.  Our solution to digitize is merely enter the 
> data into a DB we created.  However, the paper copies have to remain 
> available. We number every form we put in so that the user can then 
> search and find a paper copy by using the number generated by the 
> software.
>
> Initially we did this using the autonumber and it worked perfectly (we

> had to abandon it to allow multiple entry persons for one county.
>
> It is a row identifier and therefore always points to the same set of 
> data. If he wants to use it as an identifier let him.  I have.
>
> Reuben Cummings
> GFC, LLC
> 812.523.1017
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
> > [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com]On Behalf Of Charlotte 
> > Foust
> > Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 10:31 AM
> > To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving
> > Subject: Re: [AccessD] Autonumber Assigned Immediately
> >
> >
> > That doesn't make sense.  If you have pull data in from other tables

> > and populated fields in a new record, the autonumber should have 
> > been assigned, so there's something you aren't telling us.  And as 
> > someone else pointed out, the user should NEVER see the autonumber.

> > It has no
>
> > meaning, it merely identifies a row, not the data in the row, and it

> > should not be treated as meaningful.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> AccessD mailing list
> AccessD at databaseadvisors.com 
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
> Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> --
> AccessD mailing list
> AccessD at databaseadvisors.com 
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
> Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>




-- 
AccessD mailing list
AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com