jwcolby
jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com
Thu Mar 3 15:14:21 CST 2011
> So I guess we'll just have to leave it then that one of us is educated and the other not; wonder which one that is? ROTFL. That would be you. I have a high school education and some hours of community college. Life is strange sometimes. Circumstances didn't align for me getting a degree. My wife has one though, does that count? So, we have established who is the educated one. But I have read the books; I just strictly differentiate between academics and real world. And I have made my living in designing databases since 1994. It has been a good living. And I have made a living learning and writing applications in numerous programming languages. And I read virtually every day to stay abreast of what I need to know to do my job well. So let's just say I know your terms, I understand your terms, and I could care less about your terms. So whip out the "I'm educated" thing on someone else 'cause it doesn't do a thing for me. And by the way you still are not telling us (and Microsoft) what we are supposed to call this ... uh... hm... I don't know what to call it now... you know... the autoincrement field used as a pointer between tables thingie. Man that just sounds so... uneducated. ;) Believe me I *do* want to know so that I can avoid the next peeing match. I will try to insert your favorite name for this object in the discussion from here on out. Just an FYI, I really do know and understand normalization. I really do know and understand candidate keys. I really do search for a candidate key to cover with a unique index to enforce data uniqueness. I really do understand multi-field primary keys. I made an ... well... I hesitate to call it... an "educated" decision to *not* use them in favor of the ... here we go again... that autoincrement field used as a pointer between tables thingie. You don't know how sad it makes me to know I can no longer tell people I make "educated" decisions. 8( John W. Colby www.ColbyConsulting.com On 3/3/2011 3:10 PM, Jim Dettman wrote: > John, > > << So to get into a peeing match about my calling this thing a PK is > just silly.>> > > That's not the point. > > <<As far as I can tell, Jim is tilting at windmills.>> > > So I guess we'll just have to leave it then that one of us is educated and > the other not; wonder which one that is? > > Jim.