Reasons not to use an auto-incrementing number for a primary key

前端 未结 16 2655
南旧
南旧 2020-12-29 06:02

I\'m currently working on someone else\'s database where the primary keys are generated via a lookup table which contains a list of table names and the last primary key used

16条回答
  •  天涯浪人
    2020-12-29 06:42

    I would prefer to use a GUID for most of the scenarios in which the post's current method makes any sense to me (replication being a possible one). If replication was the issue, such a stored procedure would have to be aware of the other server which would have to be linked to ensure key uniqueness, which would make it very brittle and probably a poor way of doing this.
    One situation where I use integer primary keys that are NOT auto-incrementing identities is the case of rarely-changed lookup tables that enforce foreign key constraints, that will have a corresponding enum in the data-consuming application. In that scenario, I want to ensure the enum mapping will be correct between development and deployment, especially if there will be multiple prod servers.

提交回复
热议问题