Re: autoincremental field ?? Bug

Obnoxio The Clown wrote: > > From: "Mark D. Stock" <mdstock@mydas.freeserve.co.uk> > > > >Obnoxio The Clown wrote: > > > > > > From: "COOPER, Joseph" <Joseph.COOPER@sema.co.uk> > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Obnoxio The Clown [mailto:obnoxio@hotmail.com] > > > > > >I have tried this so many times that now I'm at about 700. > > > > > > > > > > Why are you trying to do this? Rule number 17 is that your > > > > > keys should have no meaning. So why do you care if > > > > > there's a gap? > > > > > > > >Rule No 16. The client is always right. > > > > > > NO. The client is always the client, he's definitely not always right. > > > >Unless you expect the client to pay you. > > Eh? What does "pay" mean, then? > > Anyway, that's a daft argument. If the client was always right, what have > you been doing on all your performance tuning gigs, then? :-) On those gigs, I was tuning performance, but I guess you mean did I disagree with the client. No, because they always implemented my recommendations. :-) Cheers, -- Mark. +----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+ | Mark D. Stock mailto:mdstock@mydas.freeserve.co.uk |//////// /| | http://www.informix.com http://www.informixhandbook.com |///// / //| | http://www.iiug.org +-----------------------------------+//// / ///| | |This email will self-destruct in |/// / ////| | |10 sec. If you received this email |// / /////| | |in error, sorry about the mess. |/ ////////| +----------------------+-----------------------------------+-----------+