Bug 225221 - a primary key for longdescs

Christopher Hicks chicks at chicks.net
Thu Oct 14 14:30:39 UTC 2004

On Mon, 11 Oct 2004, Joel Peshkin wrote:
> Don't gripe me about that bug.


> I commented on that very bug pointing out that the PK is needed.

That's nice, but it hardly makes a good reason for not griping. 
Particularly considering:

> Also, nobody is obstructing that bug, but nobody seems to have taken on 
> the task of making the conversion code work properly.  For existing 
> databases, it is probably necessary to first assign integers to the new 
> field in the correct order, then identify the new field as a primary 
> key.

That won't work!  How can you assign integers to something you can't 
uniquely refer to?  The simplest and most painless way to get past the 
chicken and egg problem is by having MySQL do it (as my patches have done) 
you end up with a primary key already filled out for you.  It seems so 
simple yet its taken so long and folks still don't get it.  So I gripe.


"Documentation is like sex: when it is good, it is very, very good;
and when it is bad, it is better than nothing."  -- Dick Brandon

More information about the developers mailing list