| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
| Cc: | Peter Geoghegan <peter(dot)geoghegan86(at)gmail(dot)com>, jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com, andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: extensible enum types |
| Date: | 2010-06-21 17:11:33 |
| Message-ID: | 1277140293.32273.2664.camel@ebony |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 2010-06-21 at 12:04 -0500, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> Peter Geoghegan <peter(dot)geoghegan86(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > In my experience, lookup tables generally have two columns, an
> > integer PK and a description/state.
>
> Eek. If that's what you consider a lookup table, I wouldn't
> advocate their use for anything. Ever. Period.
Do you mean you don't use relational modelling, or do you mean you would
never implement your physical database that way because of the
performance impact of RI on PostgreSQL? Or?
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | mac_man2005@hotmail.it | 2010-06-21 17:16:06 | Re: About tapes |
| Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2010-06-21 17:04:45 | Re: extensible enum types |