| From: | Don Baccus <dhogaza(at)pacifier(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | roberts(at)panix(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Help with pl/pgsql, triggers, and foreign keys |
| Date: | 2000-01-29 05:56:06 |
| Message-ID: | 3.0.1.32.20000128215606.00ed0610@mail.pacifier.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-sql |
At 11:22 PM 1/28/00 -0500, Roland Roberts wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
>The Postgres guide says that foreign keys can be partially emulated
>via triggers. Just how "partial" is this. I can't seem to get the
>following to work. Would it work if I wrote it in C? Would I need to
>open a second connection to the database? Would it work if my second
>key was really in another table?
Given that foreign keys are implemented in the current sources and
coming out for real in v7.0 beta in two weeks, how much effort do
you really want to put into emulation???
- Don Baccus, Portland OR <dhogaza(at)pacifier(dot)com>
Nature photos, on-line guides, Pacific Northwest
Rare Bird Alert Service and other goodies at
http://donb.photo.net.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Philip Warner | 2000-01-29 06:01:41 | Re: [HACKERS] Copyright |
| Previous Message | Don Baccus | 2000-01-29 05:54:34 | Re: [HACKERS] Copyright |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | root | 2000-01-29 07:53:24 | Re: [SQL] transaction aborted |
| Previous Message | Roland Roberts | 2000-01-29 04:22:54 | Help with pl/pgsql, triggers, and foreign keys |