> > By ensuring that each record receives a unique identifier and > > including that in all queries, the main issue is resolved. > > Right, but the problem is that the user didn't use the unique > identifier in the query and now I'm faced with the prospect of trying > to muck with the user's query to add the unique identifier myself. I > was trying to find out if maybe there was some other way that I > hadn't considered.
When I wrote applications that allowed the user to enter queries I added the unique key row to their query. I presented them with the data they requested and either did not show the record id, or made it read only. This allowed me to correctly identify which record to update even if they changed every field. If Jakub is right then rowid would work. Otherwise adding an autoincrement unique key field is simple.
