Well depending on how random your number is you could have a lot of collisions. It would really suck performance wise to keep trying new random numbers all the time.
-Matt > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Ross [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 2:23 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: Hacking" a shared SQL server > > Coming out of left field here as I haven't read everything but what about > in your code getting a random number, checking to make sure its not in > your table then insert it. Just run a loop. > > >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 06/06/02 03:52PM >>> > > Actually there is nothing wrong with using an integer for a primary key. > > The trick is to make sure they aren't in sequence, so that people can't > > guess other keys. > > Matt, > Do you have any methods for creating non-sequenced integer primary > keys > that aren't a performance hit? I can think of two: > > -- Have a single table with a bunch of integers in random order. > > This seems a bit cumbersome to me, but definitely possible. > > > -- Have your primary keys based off an algorithm. > > Technically, still a sequence, but definitely not as easy to figure out. > You'd have to make sure this was implemented site-wide. Perhaps a stored > procedure to pull the next based on the previous one. > > > > Ben Johnson > Hostworks, Inc. > > > ______________________________________________________________________ Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
