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

Re: cost of empty fields

From: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>
To: pgsql-admin <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: cost of empty fields
Date: 2005-04-21 04:09:57
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-admin
On Thu, Apr 21, 2005 at 04:19:02AM +0200, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> * Jim C. Nasby <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org> wrote:
> > If you setup rules on the view and just have the application select,
> > insert, update, and delete from the view instead of the raw tables you
> > won't need to change your application at all. Though you do need to be
> > aware that you can't easily enforce uniqueness across multiple tables.
> hmm. that doesnt sound stable enough for me. 
> this table is really critical and there's a lot of money in game
> (realtime currency trading ...)

Note I didn't say you couldn't do it, I just said it wasn't easy. Easy
as in adding a normal unique constraint. In this case, you need to add
triggers to the tables to check for uniqueness. It's absolutely stable,
it's just not as nice as it could be.
Jim C. Nasby, Database Consultant               decibel(at)decibel(dot)org 
Give your computer some brain candy! Team #1828

Windows: "Where do you want to go today?"
Linux: "Where do you want to go tomorrow?"
FreeBSD: "Are you guys coming, or what?"

In response to

pgsql-admin by date

Next:From: Wim BertelsDate: 2005-04-21 11:03:44
Subject: Re: brute force attacking the password
Previous:From: Enrico WeigeltDate: 2005-04-21 02:19:02
Subject: Re: cost of empty fields

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group