On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 3:30 PM, Malcolm Greene <[email protected]> wrote: > Micheal, > >> But to use an approach like this would require the use of GUID primary keys, >> I believe. Integers wouldn't work because of duplicates generated from >> multiple machines, or you'd have very complex logic for handling of integer >> keys to avoid pointing to the wrong records. > > I worked on a project where our offline clients would request a block of > primary keys from the centralized server vs. generate GUIDs. Each client > would assign primary keys from their local 'key cache', and when the > size of the cache reached a certain point, they would request another > block of primary keys from the master server during a sync session. -------------------------------------------
Why not go with GUID and then it is an easy .New() whenever you need it? Only downside with GUID is index bloat and repagination as necessary. -- Stephen Russell Sr. Production Systems Programmer Mimeo.com Memphis TN 901.246-0159 _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
