Arthur Fuller
fuller.artful at gmail.com
Wed Jul 25 13:09:52 CDT 2007
Blush! "your logic is flawless." From you, that's truly awesome praise. On 7/25/07, jwcolby <jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com> wrote: > > And you know what Arthur, your logic is flawless. There are a number of > cases where there is only a single field in the table and only ever going > to > be a single field. In those cases I would reluctantly put down my > ANPK. IN > THOSE cases, the table is really being used as a simple data integrity > monitor to force the user to select a valid choice. The two column "with > a > code" I would not so quickly put down my ANPK. In the case of a product > with a 3 char code and a ton of other useful info I absolutely would > continue to use an ANPK. The reason is simple, and comes back to join > speed. Yea, people MAY memorize all the 3 character codes but just as > likely you would be joining your 3 char field to pull more data where I > would be joining an integer. > > But congrats anyway, you have pointed out the (so far) single case where a > natural key is as good as an ANPK and causes no further problems. > > And BTW, disk space is not my primary objection, but rather join > speed. No > matter whether a lowly PC desktop or a supercomputer, speed is always an > issue. > > John W. Colby > Colby Consulting > www.ColbyConsulting.com >