From: hillmw@ram.lmtas.lmco.com   
      
   User wants to be neat   
      
   >   
   >   
   > Why? is there a business reason, or do you just prefer to be neat?   
   >   
      
   Disable them? Don't you mean drop them and then rebuild them afterwards? How   
   can they be disabled?   
      
   >   
   >   
   > Let's see you either disable all foreign key constraints involved   
   > while doing this or dump your data to files or temp tables, empty your   
   > target tables and reload, forcing the primary and foreign key values   
   > to be what you want.   
   >   
   >   
   >   
      
   yes, what am I thinking .....   
      
   >   
   > Why the two-phase approach? (12->98->4) why not just renumber lowest   
   > to highest? there is no overlap involved, just do one PK then all it's   
   > child FKs. It's a simple algorithm.   
   >   
      
   There are only 80 records in the table, but the numbering is up to 1046.   
      
   >   
   > Be I really cannot emphasize enough that you DON'T NEED to do this,   
   > unless there is a real business reason.   
   >   
      
   Ok next time ...   
      
   >   
   > and a final comment: This really should be posted in   
   > comp.databases.oracle.misc   
   >   
   > the comp.databases.oracle group is outdated and being phased out.   
   >   
   > HTH,   
   >   Ed Prochak   
   >   
   > -- there are no stupid questions.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)