> > What I find interesting in all of this exchange -- however -- is that > everyone agree's renumbering the "id" of a dB is something you don't > do, but no one can come up with a concrete (other than relational) > reason why.
If you don't care that a given record may have a different, unpredictable record number each time its queried, and if you're sure no one is going to inherit this application and be stymied by your unorthodox approach, and if you know that in the future you will not need to access this data by a static record number, it doesn't matter. Otherwise, my advice would be to add a timestamp column and sort by that instead. JM -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
