From: ibisnestremovespambit@iinet.net.au   
      
   >> 2. When I update a record in the Transactions table, the corresponding   
   >> record in TransactionDetails (i.e. the records with the same TransactionID   
   >> number) will also be updated.   
   >   
   > serious design flaw here.. the primary key should never change.. its either   
   > a sequential value, or a  system-generated value.. it's not user-defined,   
   > and should *never* change..   
   >   
      
   So the concept of "referential integrity" means what exactly?   
      
   Answer: in the event that someone wants to change the primary key in a   
   master table, the RDBMS automatically changes the key(s) in the detail   
   table(s) to retain "referential integrity".   
      
   And while some people think that the primary key should not contain   
   meaningful data, making it meaningless is really just a convention,   
   partly to make it easy for RDBMS developers.   
      
   To assign meaning to keys requires some human intervention - sometimes   
   easier to use a sequential number, especially when lots of records are   
   involved.   
      
   BTW: Why do you and Tony always jump on newcomers and tell them to go   
   elsewhere, rather than address their issues or just staying silent?   
      
   The answer to this guy's question is for him to buy a copy of Paradox   
   for a few dollars, spend a few minutes reading up on how it handles   
   table creation and relationship, and let him get on with it.   
      
   If he wants to explain how he does things in C++ or Delphi or Esperanto,   
   and we can show him how to do it in a very good RDBMS for 1/4 the time   
   (that's why it's called a 4GL, BTW), don't we all benefit?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)