RDBMS keys confusion

Question

I have some confuse about candidate key, primary key, mininal superkey.

By definition:

Primary key: only 1 attribute , so it must be minimal superkey and it's also a candidate key(because its minial superkey)

First conclusion: If a key is primary key, then it also a candidate key and a minimal superkey

The following point I think it's true, but I am not sure. Can someone confirm with me together?

1. If it's minimal superkey, it doesn't mean it's a primary key. But it means it's candidate key.

2. If it's candidate key, it doesn't neccessarily to be mininal key, also it doesn't need to be primary key.

Conclusion:

1. primary key: only 1 value, can identify whole row. It also candidate key and minimal

2. minimal superkey: 1 value or combination of fields can identify whole rows, so it's a candidate key but not necessary primary. But if takes out any one field, then it's no longer a key

3. Candidate key: 1 value or combination of fields can identify whole rows but don't have to be minimal or primary.

Answer 1

According to Wikipedia, a candidate key is a minimal superkey for a relation, and it can be made up of multiple attributes.

Your relation might have multiple candidate keys; each of those candidate keys could be the primary key - each of those candidate keys uniquely and reliably identifies each tuple in your relation.

From those (possibly several) candidate keys, you pick one to be the primary key (based on some requirements or other factors).

There can only ever be one primary key for a relation - but that primary key can be made up of several attributes (table columns).

Answer 2

The short answer is much simpler than you describe. A key (also variously known as a candidate key or primary key or secondary key or alternate key) is a minimal superkey. In other words a key is a set of attributes which are guaranteed to be irreducibly unique and never null. Keys may consist of one or more attributes and sometimes zero attributes (zero attribute keys are relatively unusual and not often discussed but are still useful as keys).

A longer explanation:

By convention and for convenience one key per relation is usually designated to be a "primary" key, meaning it is deemed to have special significance in some way. The special significance could be anything - typically it is either a key that is referenced as a foreign key in other relations or the key which is the "preferred" identifier for that relation.

It is important to understand however that a "primary" key is fundamentally no different to any other key unless you choose to make it so (or are forced to by the limitations of your DBMS software). In principle therefore there is no absolute reason why you must always designate one "primary" key. Assuming every relation has at least one candidate key (which by definition it must) then you might just as well call zero, one or more of those keys "primary". It is however a very strong convention to designate exactly one and only one primary key and that is the convention supported by the syntax of SQL-based DBMSs.

As a matter of historical detail it should be noted that E.F.Codd, inventor of the Relational Model, originally used the term Primary Key to mean any and all the keys of a relation and not just one. In modern usage however, the term candidate key is used for what were originally called the primary keys, while the designation of "primary" is used in the way I've described above. Unfortunately there exists a great deal of confusion on this point, and you will quite often see claims that "primary" keys are somehow different from other candidate keys in some arbitrary way.

Here is Hugh Darwen on the subject of keys:

a relvar can have several keys, but we choose just one for underlining and call that one the primary key. The choice is arbitrary, so the concept of primary is not really very important from a logical point of view. The general concept of key, however, is very important! The term candidate key means exactly the same as key (i.e., the addition of candidate has no real significance—it was proposed by Ted Codd because he regarded each key as a candidate for being nominated as the primary key).

http://www.dcs.warwick.ac.uk/~hugh/M359/What-Is-a-Key.html

Answer 3

So, what I make out from your question is you are confused about basic 3 keys(or rather 4) that are generally used in DBMS. I'll try explaining them in brief and easy to understand language:

1) SUPER KEYS:

The single attribute or set of attributes which can be used to uniquely identify each tuple(row) in a table is called a super key(think of it as a large number of keys are possible to be called as super keys as there could be many combinations of attribute that makes it uniquely identifiable)-But just remember one thing for Super key "UNIQUENESS".

2) CANDIDATE KEYS(MINIMAL SUPER KEYS):

Out of all the Super keys that we get we start to identify keys which are the most minimal of all ie. which cannot be broken down further (in terms of composition of attributes) and if they are broken we lose the uniqueness comes under the category of CANDIDATE KEYS.-just remember one thing for Candidate keys "UNIQUENESS" +"IRREDUCIBILITY".

3)PRIMARY KEY:

Now out of All left over Candidate keys we select one that would be the most optimized way to search any row in the table to make it as primary keys.It is designers choice which key he wants to make primary out of all another candidate key but still, it prefers to follow some rules like:

A)prefer to take a key with numerals and not text as PK.

B)prefer to take a key for which data owner has a control on it.

C)prefer the one which is of shorter length.

d)and, prefer keys noncomposite key, if they happen to exist.

I hope this helps you to get the concept clear.