Hi, I'm looking for a discussion regarding the temptation to use surrogate keys in integration data.
I know that exposing a surrogate key to an external system will naturalize the key, it would become a business data element. I want to avoid that. However, we find we have a requirement to use a unique identifier to correlate the entity among the systems that share the entity. That identifier would likely be called an 'id', just like the surrogate key. Are you successful in keeping your surrogate key hidden, and how do you do that? I want to keep the surrogate key of a Customer, named 'id', hidden. Unfortunately, a business level identifier would also be called a 'customer id'. In order to avoid a confusion, there is temptation to expose the Customer id field. I don't have a good name for the business level identifier. Thanks, John -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/surrogate-key-and-integration-pattern-tp28749325p28749325.html Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
