tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9236822.post5784974724190496151..comments2023-07-27T08:00:06.475-04:00Comments on YooperGeek: Weird SQL2005 TempDB Table and Primary Key BehaviorJason Pollhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13833122086713002530noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9236822.post-2541117922053162662007-09-13T15:13:00.000-04:002007-09-13T15:13:00.000-04:00That is exactly why I was naming the primary key o...That is exactly why I was naming the primary key of my temp table: strictly out of habit. <BR/><BR/>Or, at least, it hadn't even occurred to me at the time that I didn't have to give the primary key a name. :)Jason Pollhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13833122086713002530noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9236822.post-34862016355107681972007-09-11T10:18:00.000-04:002007-09-11T10:18:00.000-04:00No, but I could have written the same post you did...No, but I could have written the same post you did. My experience exactly. Same work around also. I think this may be the case with 2000 as well as 2005. <BR/><BR/>Even though it's a temporary table, I'm guessing you name the primary key as a convention - you do it for normal tables so that you can have easy programatic control over then at some stage if necessary. Probably unnecessary for temporary tables, but nice to keep the option open. That's my reason anyway...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com