meta user
network profile
| bio | website | |
|---|---|---|
| location | ||
| age | ||
| visits | member for | 2 years, 1 month |
| seen | yesterday | |
| stats | profile views | 73 |
|
Feb 20 |
answered | Would it be considered as a bad practice to have multiple nullable FKs on a table in SQL Server |
|
Feb 17 |
awarded | Tag Editor |
|
Feb 6 |
answered | What computations can NOT be performed in standard SQL? |
|
Jan 25 |
comment |
Shrinking log file If your log files are growing regularly then shrinking like that is a massively counter-productive thing to do. Don't do it. By doing this you are invalidating the log backup sequence. My guess is you are using FULL recovery when you might be better off using SIMPLE. |
|
Jan 25 |
comment |
Is an anomaly free relation necessarily normalized? If "all normal forms" includes DKNF then the answer is no. A relation in 6NF does not have undesirable update, insertion or deletion anomalies in the usual sense but it still may not satisfy DKNF. On the other hand DKNF is not very important and is frequently irrelevant or unachievable. |
|
Jan 20 |
awarded | Nice Answer |
|
Jan 11 |
answered | why doesn't time for a simple update scale linearly with the number of records? |
|
Jan 9 |
comment |
SQL Server : primary keys advice to my whitepaper needed It is premature optimization to allow the choice of clustered index to dictate the primary key of your tables. Very premature and very unnecessary! |
|
Jan 9 |
comment |
SQL Server : primary keys advice to my whitepaper needed All of your points are wrong because they apparently refer to the properties of clustered indexes and not primary keys. Clustered indexes and primary keys are two different things. |
|
Jan 9 |
awarded | Cleanup |
|
Jan 9 |
revised |
What Is The Point of a Primary Key? "unique key" is a pointless tautology - keys are unique by definition. To be absolutely clear I have substituted "candidate key" instead. |
|
Jan 9 |
revised |
What Is The Point of a Primary Key? rolled back to a previous revision |
|
Jan 6 |
awarded | Enlightened |
|
Jan 6 |
awarded | Nice Answer |
|
Dec 24 |
comment |
Temporarily disable checking of constraints Oleg, I think it's not clear why you are suggesting "WITH NOCHECK CHECK" instead of "WITH CHECK CHECK". The latter should generally be used unless you intend to do it anyway later on. |
|
Dec 17 |
answered | Is normalization process needed? |
|
Dec 17 |
comment |
What Is The Point of a Primary Key? @BenBrocka, Are you sure you know what a key is? Uniqueness constraints and indexes are just two possible ways to implement keys - they are not alternatives to keys! |
|
Dec 17 |
comment |
What Is The Point of a Primary Key? @BenBrocka, In SQL DBMSs many operations are difficult or impossible unless you can uniquely identify rows. Whole features may be disabled or crippled without keys. I don't see how you can justify a claim that the "ordinary data manipulation will work fine" without keys. I think there's plenty of evidence that lack of keys and the problem of duplicate rows cost vast amounts of time and money for database customers to fix. The fact that keys and uniqueness are not automatically enforced is the most serious flaw of SQL-based systems and the most difficult problem to solve. |
|
Dec 16 |
comment |
What Is The Point of a Primary Key? One definition (E.F.Codd's) is that a surrogate is a stand in for another key in the same table. Another possible definition is simply that a surrogate key is a key that doesn't mean anything in the external Universe of Discourse. I prefer the second definition. |
|
Dec 16 |
comment |
What Is The Point of a Primary Key? @db2, My point was that we can't reliably say based only a data structure that an auto-incrementing column called Id is "meaningless". It depends how it is being used. If I use it as an order number then that is a "meaningful" key like any other business key. I would recommend not using auto-incrementing columns for such purposes but I've seen plenty of examples where people do use them for meaningful (non-surrogate) business keys. |
