| From: | "Zeugswetter Andreas DCP SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Andrew Hammond" <andrew(dot)george(dot)hammond(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Aaron Bono" <postgresql(at)aranya(dot)com> |
| Cc: | <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [SQL] using constraint based paritioning to fix EAV type schemas? (view inheritance and constraints) |
| Date: | 2006-07-19 07:45:56 |
| Message-ID: | E1539E0ED7043848906A8FF995BDA579012B4435@m0143.s-mxs.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-sql |
> I've seen a few EAV designs in practice. They've all been
> problematic. I'd like to have a better way of dealing with
> them. Which is why I'm tentatively suggesting support for
> inheritance and constraints in views. If there's some other
> way to achieve constraint based exclusion across a UNION of
> heterogenous tables, I'd love to hear it.
If you do your own rules anyway, why can't you use inheritance and
create the rules
on the parent table and the constraints on the child tables ?
You can still use the child tables directly if you want.
Andreas
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Zeugswetter Andreas DCP SD | 2006-07-19 07:56:06 | Re: [SQL] using constraint based paritioning to fix EAV type schemas? (view inheritance and constraints) |
| Previous Message | Zeugswetter Andreas DCP SD | 2006-07-19 07:36:10 | Re: Possible Typecasting Bug with coalesce() |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Florian Weimer | 2006-07-19 08:30:39 | INSERT/UPDATEs cycles and lack of phantom locking |
| Previous Message | Phillip Smith | 2006-07-19 07:34:58 | Table Join (Maybe?) |