[development] Why do we avoid auto-incrementing db columns?
cxjohnson at gmail.com
Thu Apr 26 13:18:06 UTC 2007
Better than dropping support for MyISAM tables would be dropping
support for hosts which don't allow locking. :-)
Pardon my rant for the moment, but WTF is up with that? What's the
point of even having an RDBMS if you can't guarantee any of your data
changing operations with a lock? (Rhetorical question, you all -- I
can think of some reasons, really.)
I think the best argument against stored-procedures and triggers is
the amount of extra effort it will require a volunteer open-source
effort to maintain across multiple databases. CRUD SQL is the most
"portable" of all SQL, but even that has its problems as we know.
Then comes DDL (table creation) SQL. Stuff like stored procedures is
likely way on the incompatible between DB vendors scale. Are the
gains worth the very real increases in labor required?
More information about the development