Re: question on serial key
От | Roderick A. Anderson |
---|---|
Тема | Re: question on serial key |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4A16B61B.6090608@cyber-office.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: question on serial key (Brandon Metcalf <brandon@geronimoalloys.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: question on serial key
|
Список | pgsql-general |
Brandon Metcalf wrote: > g == gryzman@gmail.com writes: > > g> you should use it, whenever you need db to keep its own key internally. > g> Advantage of sequence is also the fact, that you can have the sequence > g> value used on different columns/tables . > > g> My rule of thumb is , in that case: as long as it is a short type (not > g> of toastable, or/and variable length), and as long as it won't change, > g> and is unique - I can use it. Otherwise, I use sequence to connect > g> rows internally for database. > g> First rule, is because of index access, and the way btree works. > g> Second is, because update of value will update other rows too - and > g> HOT won't help you here, so that's not efficient. And also, forcing it > g> to be unique is harder than. > > g> Hth. > > That does help. So, in my example of a table consisting of rows for > each periodic table element, the atomic number would suffice as a > unique key since, well, it's unique and not going to change. Right? Well you never know. They took planet status away from Pluto. :-) \\||/ Rod --
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: