I think you wanted to say 'If the value is null'.

Yes, I'm on you in your preference. I also think that developers should use
GUIDs/UUIDs as record keys.

But we are speaking about a implementation that will use all the things that
IB already have: Triggers, System triggers, and Generators.

(If this new field will give the possibility to the user to choose the
Generator, the developer could set in all tables of the database to use the
same generator, and you will have a very ugly version of a UUID, hehehe).


Artur Anjos

----- Original Message -----
From: "Leyne, Sean" <sleyne@...>
To: <ib-support@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 4:42 PM
Subject: RE: [ib-support] Idea for a new field type for FB 2,0 or IB 7?


>
> I would prefer that developers start using GUIDs/UUIDs as record keys.
>
> In that way, the client can generate the key (thus eliminating most of
> the need for the RETURNING syntax to the INSERT statement) while still
> providing support for the server to assign the value, either thru user
> defined triggers or by the system itself just before the record is
> written (if the value is blank).
>
>
> Sean
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> ib-support-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>