Dave, I am sure you have a good point. I didn't really like it when I came across the 'date in primary key' either but had no real reason to change until now.
I guess my mail was to alert anyone else following this route to the problem. We don't all have control over the schemas we have to write code for. .../Bob -----Original Message----- From: Dave Newton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 01 April 2004 16:55 To: Apache Torque Users List Subject: RE: Oracle 9i TIMESTAMP in primary key problems > From: Bob Davison [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Due to the problems with the Oracle 9i JDBC drivers and DATE columns we > moved to TIMESTAMP columns instead. This seemed fine until we used one > of these columns in a primary key. Totally unrelated, but I thought using "real-world data" as a primary key (or portion thereof) was generally a no-no in the DB world. Did I misunderstand? Dave --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------- - Visit our Internet site at http://www.reuters.com Get closer to the financial markets with Reuters Messaging - for more information and to register, visit http://www.reuters.com/messaging Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of Reuters Ltd. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
