Yes, I've read the article, and have been slowly hacking away at a
counter-article for a few months now.  Wake up people, it's 2007, and
multi-column primary keys are *still* a dumb idea.

On Feb 27, 4:11 am, Langdon Stevenson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Hi Adrian
>
> > Is this still true for Cake 1.2.x.x ?
>
> Given the trac link that I posted, I think it is unlikely that you will
> find support for it in 1.2.
>
> > You might find this article interesting. It is about surrogate primary
> > key ( 'id' - integer )
> > which are sometimes convenient (from a performance point of view) but
> > are in fact
> > an evil compromise because such a primary key *does* allow row duplicates :
>
> >http://blogs.ittoolbox.com/database/soup/archives/primary-keyvil-part...
>
> Interesting article.  I understand the reasoning.
>
> My personal opinion is basically irrelevant given that I have nothing to
> do with the core development of Cake.  However, personally I don't
> really see a problem with surrogate primary keys (given good business
> logic).
>
> The business logic of the applications that I develop deal with the
> issue of uniqueness based on exactly the kind of rules that the article
> specified, so I don't have a problem.  It would be nice to have the
> option of a primary key that double check the uniqueness, but I don't
> miss it.
>
> Also worth noting is (as the article points out) composite primary keys
> incur a performance cost.  So, given that I am already checking
> uniqueness in the business logic, I will take the performance gain of
> surrogate primary keys and keep checking the data in the business logic.
>
> Regards,
> Langdon


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Cake 
PHP" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/cake-php?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to