From: | "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk> |
---|---|
To: | "Stephan Szabo" <sszabo(at)megazone23(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> |
Cc: | <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: foreign Key problem |
Date: | 2002-06-24 15:20:17 |
Message-ID: | D85C66DA59BA044EB96AB9683819CF6101510F@dogbert.vale-housing.co.uk |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephan Szabo [mailto:sszabo(at)megazone23(dot)bigpanda(dot)com]
> Sent: 24 June 2002 16:15
> To: Dave Page
> Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: RE: [GENERAL] foreign Key problem
>
> As a side note, if you're willing to do a few extra inserts,
> there are some workarounds for the foreign key case involving
> another table where you get ids from there and reference that
> table from each of the tables in the hierarchy and tables
> that want to reference the hierarchy reference that table.
>
Hmm, the major reason for wanting the foreign key is maintain integrity
between sys_users & dms_acl. It'll probably be easiest for me to just
remove that foreign key and ensure the app deletes matching acl records
when a particular user is deleted. At least then I can just add the fkey
when/if PostgreSQL gets fixed and won't have a mess of a design left
over from a workaround.
Thanks anyway,
Dave.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-06-24 15:21:01 | Re: Table name length (maximum identifier length) |
Previous Message | Stephan Szabo | 2002-06-24 15:14:34 | Re: foreign Key problem |