>>Thanks,Arnon.
>>
>>Just for my clarity, say we have
>>
>> Customer table -- Custcode is actual ( intended ) Candidate key
>> Invoice table -- Invoice No is original candidate key.I_custcode
>>was field used to relate to customer.
>>
>>Now we propose to relate with field I_custsurrogate .
>
>well you don't have to do that, it is usually better practice though
>(g)
>IAC once you add a surrogatekey you can turn the index of CustCode to
>regular
>
>>Should I_custcode field be dropped from Invoice table ?? Or would u suggest
>>to carry that field also ?
>no need to have the old forign key
>
>>Also , i recall having read somewhere about complications with Relations/RI
>>during data maintenance --
>> 1) deleting index file and recreating indexes
>> 2) Zapping table and re-appending data
>>Can u please advise ?
>
>this is not related to the surrogate key issue
>this is related to the way the DBC handles the deletion of indexes etc.
>the problem is that if all the TAGs are deleted all the extended information
>stored in the DBC is being deleted as well
>you can solve this by yourself (given some work) but you may want to check
>out Stonfied Database Toolkit which will do this (and more) for you
>
>Arnon

Arnon, thanks a lot.

Prakash