Kirsten, Our DBAs considered and rejected sequential GUIDs.
My best advice is don't solve half the problem :-) If you are using the latest Visual Studio database tools then rewriting the solution may not be as onerous as you fear. Finding all references to the single key and replacing them with two key references would be well within the capabilities of the tooling. -- Regards, noonie On 4 February 2012 15:38, Kirsten Greed <kirst...@jobtalk.com.au> wrote: > ** ** ** ** > > Noonie**** > > ** ** > > Were you using NEWSEQUENTIALID() in the app that had problems in > production?**** > > David Amos also mentioned NEWSEQUENTIALID() to keep fragmentation down – > but I missed it’s importance.**** > > ** ** > > Bill – thanks for the info and link.**** > > ** ** > > I am thinking that the problem with 2 part keys is that it’s a bigger > re-write than changing primary keys. I am sure to forget to add the 2ndkey > in places! > **** > > ** ** > > Kirsten**** > > **** > ------------------------------ > > *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto: > ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] *On Behalf Of *Bill Chesnut > *Sent:* Saturday, 4 February 2012 3:20 PM > *To:* **ozDotNet > ** > *Subject:* RE: Making an application that uses identity keys > occassionallyconnected > **** > > ** ** > > Kirsten,**** > > **** > > One issue with GUID keys is that they are not one-up so with clustered > indexes base on a GUID, inserting new records into a table typically can > cause a page split, which is expensive, there is a different algorithm to > generate a GUID that is always increasing so it acts more like an integer > key.**** > > **** > > In SQL 2005 and above it is NEWSEQUENTIALID() and there is code to > generate it in .net I think.**** > > **** > > Good article that compares all of these key types: > http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/32597/Performance-Comparison-Identity-x-NewId-x-NewSeque > **** > > > > Bill Chesnut > BizTalk Server MVP > ****Melbourne**, **Australia******** > ------------------------------ > > * > * >
