Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: FK's to refer to rows in inheritance child

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Yeb Havinga <yebhavinga(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "w(dot)p(dot)dijkstra(at)mgrid(dot)net" <w(dot)p(dot)dijkstra(at)mgrid(dot)net>
Subject: Re: FK's to refer to rows in inheritance child
Date: 2010-12-01 15:05:50
Message-ID: 15745.1291215950@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Yeb Havinga <yebhavinga(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On 2010-12-01 15:27, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Indeed.  This isn't even worth the time to review, unless you have a
>> proposal for fixing the unique-index-across-multiple-tables problem.

> That was in the part that you chose to not quote.

Perhaps I should have said "possibly workable proposal".  What you wrote
doesn't even begin to cover the interesting part of the problem, namely
how to ensure uniqueness is preserved in the face of concurrent
insertions.

(My current feelings about this are that a general-purpose solution
would probably cost more than it's worth.  What people really care
about is FK to a partitioned table, which is a structure in which
we don't have to solve the general problem: if we know that the
partitioning prevents the same key from appearing in multiple
partitions, then we only have to look into one partition.  So this
is just another item that's pending introduction of real partitioning
infrastructure.)

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: David FetterDate: 2010-12-01 15:11:06
Subject: Re: Proposal: First step towards Intelligent,integrated database
Previous:From: Andrew DunstanDate: 2010-12-01 14:59:17
Subject: Re: Proposal: First step towards Intelligent, integrateddatabase

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group