Chris, You do have a problem vis a vis the foreign databases. I agree that you don't have much choice in those cases.
I do use the unique id when synching - there isn't much choice. But prefer to use it just for synching. I refer to it as the synch ID. I generate my own unique logical record ID for establishing relationships between records. That way, I can link records in my desktop software prior to synching with the handheld. I leave it to the handheld to generate a synch ID for new records during the synching process. If I didn't do this, I would have to generate a synch ID to link my records created on the desktop and I found the allocation algorithmn to be confusing and therefore problematic. In addition, I am not limited to a 24 bit value if I generate and manage my own logical record ID - I use a 32 bit unsigned value. Ralph "Chris Tutty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Yeah, but this is what's confusing me. As far as I can tell the > documentation > suggests that they've been reliable since v3 or so, or earlier unless you're > using a Mac version of hotsync. So why is the final word in all these > conversations "Yeah we agree, but don't use them"? They're either a solid > and reliable mechanism for long-term record referencing or they're not. > > And the reason I'm hammering is this is because maintaining your own > unique ID is only easy for your own databases. I'm frequently asked > to link behaviour to records in the standard Palm OS databases > (contacts, memopad, etc). For these databases the Palm OS uniqueID > is the only reference point available. > > Even in your own databases - why duplicate a mechanism already > provided by the OS? I no longer have any requirements to support OS's > earlier than 3.5 - to your knowledge are the UniqueIDs unreliable in > 3.5? > > Chris Tutty > > From: "Ralph Curtis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > If you want to build relationships you are better off using a record ID > that > > you control. It is not difficult to allocate and maintain your own unique > > record IDs and it will work regardless of the OS version. Keep the last or > > next allocated ID in the appinfo and work from there. > > > > "Chris Tutty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Hi, > > > > > > I've avoided the UniqueIDs maintained by Palm OS in the past because > > > of my memeory to do with them not surviving a reset (or was it resyncing > > > the db that killed them?). I was talking to someone recently who > > suggested > > > that under Palm OS 5+ UniqueIDs could be used to maintain references > > > between databases for the lifetime of the application. Has something > > > changed? > > > > > > Chris Tutty. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > For information on using the Palm Developer Forums, or to unsubscribe, > please see http://www.palmos.com/dev/support/forums/ > > -- For information on using the Palm Developer Forums, or to unsubscribe, please see http://www.palmos.com/dev/support/forums/
