Ann W. Harrison wrote:

> Lester Caine wrote:
>
>> Using generators for that does sound something of overkill.
>
> Aside from the fact that the application might try to create
> more than 32K of generators, what's the problem? Generators
> are nearly free in terms of space on disk and much faster to
> generate than numbers kept in a table.

Hooking up and managing a big array of generators just seems the wrong approach.
And in situations were one does go over 32k items then you have the problem of
how do you cover everything anyway.

Bhavbhuti
Don't forget that even if you call a value from a generator and then don't use
it for some reason - there will be a hole. At least with a table if yo go to add
something but then abort - perhaps because it was actually the wrong product
when you cross check - then next time you look at that product you will see the
last used batch number, while a generator may be one further on ;)

Everthing has it's plusses and minuses :)

--
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-----------------------------
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk//
Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php