Re: Does it make sense to have 2 unique keys in one table?

In <44tfqj$k53@auntie.bbcnc.org.uk> pauland@bbcnc.org.uk (Paul Andrews) writes: > >In article <44t09t$av8@ixnews5.ix.netcom.com>, woodwabo@ix.netcom.com (Bob Woodward) says: >> >>In <44sig8$ggv@ulowell.uml.edu> dchan@dragon.cpe.ulowell.edu (Empty) >>writes: >>> >>>if the columns are partially duplicated, like >>> >>>unique key1 unique key2 >>>column1 column3 >>>column2 column4 >>>column3 >>>column4 ><snip> >>If key1 and key2 are different values, you might have a choice. If you >>have an issue with storage capacity, the structure you show above would >>not be the best. If, however, your biggest issue was performance ><snip> > >What's the matter with unique key2 as a seperate index? > >Paul Nothing wrong with that, depending on what platform you're using and network traffic loads. The question was if the approach outlined made any sense. I think it did under given circumstances. Many other options are available.