If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Separate PK in Jxn Tbl?
"Larry Daugherty" wrote:
This boil up is a variation of the "Autonumber vs. Natural Key" religious wars that sweep the Access groups on even numbered(?) years. In the meantime OP is probably trying to hide the matches with which he started the fires.... chuckle Yup, it's amazing how this all happens. To me the particularly amusing part is that we're generally quite civil in our discussions that stay in the Access groups. I'm saddened, although not surprised, at the comments from a few regulars from the c.d.theory newsgroup using words such as idiot, imbecile and invincibly ignorant. Tony -- Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can read the entire thread of messages. Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm Tony's Microsoft Access Blog - http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/ |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Separate PK in Jxn Tbl?
On Jan 24, 8:53 pm, "Tony Toews [MVP]" wrote:
JOG wrote: I just think you're all damn brave for using Access in the first place. Why? I was tempted to simply reply: "avoiding using Access is just a rule I have. Why? No good reason. The access fanboys will argue. I don't care" ....but, hey that sort of sentiment would surely just be peurile, and discourage useful discussion would it not? It works and works well. If you have too many users or remote users bolt on a SQL Server backend. Now you can have thousands of users. Or I could just use a decent database architecture in the first place (and I am lucky enough to be able to), that can cope with more that 10 users (I mean 255 *cough*). Thats why I salute your dedication in the face of all that superior db technology. I mean, we all know that the client really wants to use oracle, and yet its you that stoutly has to deal with his corner cutting as best you can. I certainly don't mean to upset you....Well okay, maybe there's just a bit of friendly ribbing in there Tony -- Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can read the entire thread of messages. Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems athttp://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm Tony's Microsoft Access Blog -http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/ |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Separate PK in Jxn Tbl?
Every dog gets one bite. Then they go into the bs/Kill file.
Did you note the net contribution to the subject at hand? Their commentary serves only to identify and characterize *themselves* My hope is to make meaningful contributions to those who are actually developing applications or learning to do so. Keep up the good work! -- -Larry- -- "Tony Toews [MVP]" wrote in message ... "Larry Daugherty" wrote: This boil up is a variation of the "Autonumber vs. Natural Key" religious wars that sweep the Access groups on even numbered(?) years. In the meantime OP is probably trying to hide the matches with which he started the fires.... chuckle Yup, it's amazing how this all happens. To me the particularly amusing part is that we're generally quite civil in our discussions that stay in the Access groups. I'm saddened, although not surprised, at the comments from a few regulars from the c.d.theory newsgroup using words such as idiot, imbecile and invincibly ignorant. Tony -- Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can read the entire thread of messages. Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm Tony's Microsoft Access Blog - http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/ |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Separate PK in Jxn Tbl?
Larry Daugherty wrote:
Every dog gets one bite. Then they go into the bs/Kill file. Did you note the net contribution to the subject at hand? Their commentary serves only to identify and characterize *themselves* My hope is to make meaningful contributions to those who are actually developing applications or learning to do so. Your hope is futile in the face of your ignorance and laziness. Keep up the good work! I'll try. "Tony Toews [MVP]" wrote in message ... "Larry Daugherty" wrote: This boil up is a variation of the "Autonumber vs. Natural Key" religious wars that sweep the Access groups on even numbered(?) years. In the meantime OP is probably trying to hide the matches with which he started the fires.... chuckle Yup, it's amazing how this all happens. To me the particularly amusing part is that we're generally quite civil in our discussions that stay in the Access groups. Ignorance is bliss. I'm saddened, although not surprised, at the comments from a few regulars from the c.d.theory newsgroup using words such as idiot, imbecile and invincibly ignorant. Precious few pleasant ways exist to express unpleasant truths. However, intellectual honesty requires the expression of truths regardless of appeal to oneself or to others. |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Separate PK in Jxn Tbl?
JOG wrote:
Why? I was tempted to simply reply: "avoiding using Access is just a rule I have. Why? No good reason. The access fanboys will argue. I don't care" ...but, hey that sort of sentiment would surely just be peurile, and discourage useful discussion would it not? chuckle It works and works well. If you have too many users or remote users bolt on a SQL Server backend. Now you can have thousands of users. Or I could just use a decent database architecture in the first place (and I am lucky enough to be able to), that can cope with more that 10 users (I mean 255 *cough*). Thats why I salute your dedication in the face of all that superior db technology. I mean, we all know that the client really wants to use oracle, and yet its you that stoutly has to deal with his corner cutting as best you can. But in many situations why go to the extra effort of Oracle or cough SQL Server required? I seldom create systems that will be used by more than ten people. Using Access in such an environment is a simpler install and simple updating. No DBA required and very little IT admin. I certainly don't mean to upset you....Well okay, maybe there's just a bit of friendly ribbing in there smile Tony -- Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can read the entire thread of messages. Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm Tony's Microsoft Access Blog - http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/ |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
Separate PK in Jxn Tbl?
JOG wrote:
I was tempted to simply reply: "avoiding using Access is just a rule I have. Why? No good reason. The access fanboys will argue. I don't care" ...but, hey that sort of sentiment would surely just be peurile, and discourage useful discussion would it not? BTW I didn't realize that there were people in the theory newsgroup who actually wanted to discuss the issues in a reasonable fashion. Tony -- Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can read the entire thread of messages. Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm Tony's Microsoft Access Blog - http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/ |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
Separate PK in Jxn Tbl?
Bob Badour wrote:
chuckle Yup, it's amazing how this all happens. To me the particularly amusing part is that we're generally quite civil in our discussions that stay in the Access groups. Ignorance is bliss. Politeness goes a long way. Tony -- Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can read the entire thread of messages. Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm Tony's Microsoft Access Blog - http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/ |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
Separate PK in Jxn Tbl?
lyle fairfield wrote:
Bob Badour wrote in news:4799368c$0$4065 : Bull****! Ignorance, stupidity and laziness are not practical. If you�re feeling angry because you can�t program or design databases well, Your question suffers the fallacy of many questions. First, I don't feel angry at all. Second, I can do both very well. Are you feeling angry because you can't program or design databases well? perhaps you could describe your problems here, instead of posting streams of invective. I�m sure that Tony, James or Larry will be able to simplify the concepts required and suggest solutions suitable even for someone who seems so backward and confused. Since they are simpletons, I have no doubt they would simplify the concepts ... beyond all recognition. Hope this helps! |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
Separate PK in Jxn Tbl?
Tony Toews [MVP] wrote: "Neil" wrote: However, I just came across some code in which the person created a junction table with a separate PK consisting of an autonumber field, and then the two fields. So I was wondering how others did junction tables -- with a standalone autonumber PK, or with a PK consisting of the PKs of the tables being joined? And, if a standalone PK, then why? I always use an autonumber PK and a uniqui index set on the two FK fields. Why? No particular good reason. One of my database rules is that all tables have an autonumber primary key. It's also slightly easier to delete the record in code. Now if I was to have a child table from the junction table then I would absolutely use a autonumber primary key for ease of use when designing queries, forms and reports. The theorists will argue. I don't care. Tony Why introduce an autonumber as a PK when you don't need to? This design is broken as noted in the discussion on library book example. Why make the application code work harder than it has to? Let the DBMS do the work that it is good at. Note I'm no theorist. I'm a stuck in the trenches Software Engineer. There are times to use an autonumber PK. But in this case I would say you are fooling yourself in thinking this is good design practice. Ed |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
Separate PK in Jxn Tbl?
"Tony Toews [MVP]" wrote in message ... "Larry Daugherty" wrote: This boil up is a variation of the "Autonumber vs. Natural Key" religious wars that sweep the Access groups on even numbered(?) years. In the meantime OP is probably trying to hide the matches with which he started the fires.... chuckle Yup, it's amazing how this all happens. To me the particularly amusing part is that we're generally quite civil in our discussions that stay in the Access groups. I'm saddened, although not surprised, at the comments from a few regulars from the c.d.theory newsgroup using words such as idiot, imbecile and invincibly ignorant. Are we feeling a bit abused? Do we need a pity party? All together now, 1...2...3.... There, now, did that make poor little Tony feel any better? Please don't lump me in with Badour. I rarely use the terms, 'idiot' and 'imbecile,' but (and I think if you'll reexamine it dispassionately, you'll agree) your original statement in this thread was, in my opinion, pretty idiotic. Oh, and by the way, you still haven't shared your reasons. What are you afraid of? Tony -- Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can read the entire thread of messages. Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm Tony's Microsoft Access Blog - http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|