| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Gabriele Bartolini <gabriele(dot)bartolini(at)2ndquadrant(dot)it>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Marco Nenciarini <marco(dot)nenciarini(at)2ndquadrant(dot)it> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Support for foreign keys with arrays |
| Date: | 2011-11-25 04:52:45 |
| Message-ID: | 1322196765.23871.5.camel@vanquo.pezone.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On mån, 2011-11-21 at 10:30 -0600, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> I like the idea of being able to define more flexible foreign keys,
> but are we gilding the lily here? The proposed solution is really
> quite specific to the nuances of arrays. Perhaps there is a more
> general expression based syntax that leaves the door open for other
> types conditions such as dealing fields dependent on other fields?
Yeah, basically you'd just need a contains and/or is-contained-by
operator between the two types.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavan Deolasee | 2011-11-25 04:54:23 | Re: Storing hot members of PGPROC out of the band |
| Previous Message | NISHIYAMA Tomoaki | 2011-11-25 04:13:12 | Re: [PATCH] PostgreSQL fails to build with 32bit MinGW-w64 |