> >Just add an ID field to the record. It is a lot easier to manage. The
> >alternative
> >is to use the generator number, * 100 + User ID, but it is a lot easier
> >to find
> >all the mods done by ID=X if you can just filter on that field!

> Why is this easier to manage?

For the reason stated - if you have a separate ID field you can filter
on that and find all the mods by user X. Trying to apply MOD in a filter
HAS to be slower.

> And about the generator number * 100 + UserID... Why do you think that
> is any better or easier?

Because you only increment the generator by one, and there is no chance
of it getting 'corrupted' by not being a multiple of 100.

> The ID would give me an additional field and my pk would be 2 fields > wide.
> Is the mod UDF so slow
> that it will seriously degrade performance if I ever need to check that?

Anything that can not be indexed or easily filtered will be slow.

> (Like I said there is more stuff to this peer to peer, I have a UserID
> field that is used on every Edit/Insert,
> but is changable so is not suitable for a PK, but is the only one I should
> be needing when updating)

The PK is STILL the Generator output, you do not need to add the user ID
to it as only one user can add one number. If anything it prevents the
situation where you COULD have the same top number with different users.
123433 and 123444 are unique and will not be trapped by PK,
While 1234 ID 33 will prevent 1234 ID 44 from being allowed.

--
Lester Caine
-----------------------------
L.S.Caine Electronic Services