On 5/3/06, Richard Lynch <ceo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Tue, May 2, 2006 7:22 am, chris smith wrote: > On 5/2/06, Ross <ross@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> This is my database now...I will use the item_id for the order but >> what if I >> want to change item_id 3 to item id 1? How can I push all the items >> down one >> place? How can I delete any gaps when items are deleted. > > Why do you want to do that? There's no benefit in doing this.. > actually it becomes a pain. > > You'd need to update not only this table but any field in other tables > that references this one as well (and if you miss one, you have a > completely useless database). No, we've got past that bit.
I posted that answer yesterday... By the time I got back to the thread everyone had worked out that he wanted to use it for ordering results ;)
While you are at it, "id" is an awfully generic name for a field, really. I personally prefer: create table foo (foo_id int(11) auto_increment, ...); But, hey, a lot of folks go with just "id" on everything, and seem okay with that. [shrug]
Very true - would get rather confusing in link tables: create table news_cat (id int, id int);.... heh. -- Postgresql & php tutorials http://www.designmagick.com/ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
