On Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 12:02 PM Adrian Klaver <adrian.kla...@aklaver.com> wrote:
> On 4/19/19 11:32 AM, Ken Tanzer wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 11:20 AM Adrian Klaver > > <adrian.kla...@aklaver.com <mailto:adrian.kla...@aklaver.com>> wrote: > > > > On 4/19/19 11:14 AM, Rich Shepard wrote: > > > On Fri, 19 Apr 2019, Adrian Klaver wrote: > > > > > >> If it is working for you now I see no reason to switch. > > > > > > Adrian, > > > > > > It does work. I just learned about the SQL identity type and want > > to learn > > > when it's most appropriate to use. The databases I develop all > > work with > > > integers as primary keys and reading about the type didn't > > clarify (for me) > > > when it should be used. > > > > Mainly for folks that want cross database SQL compliance. It is not a > > type so much as a way of specifying an auto-increment column. > > > > > > It also sounds like it has advantages in terms of tying your sequence > > directly to the column. If you drop a serial column, it doesn't drop > > the sequence. > > A serial column will: > > Thanks Adrian. You are as usual correct. (I had a bunch of tables created by a function that I assumed were serial, but were not.) Identity columns still seem tidier and more manageable. Can you tell if the function I referenced would change the ownership or not? Cheers, Ken -- AGENCY Software A Free Software data system By and for non-profits *http://agency-software.org/ <http://agency-software.org/>* *https://demo.agency-software.org/client <https://demo.agency-software.org/client>* ken.tan...@agency-software.org (253) 245-3801 Subscribe to the mailing list <agency-general-requ...@lists.sourceforge.net?body=subscribe> to learn more about AGENCY or follow the discussion.
