Re: Inheritance and foreign keys

From: Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone(dot)bigpanda(dot)com>
To: Brendan Jurd <blakjak(at)blakjak(dot)sytes(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Inheritance and foreign keys
Date: 2003-12-08 22:26:24
Message-ID: 20031208141920.K30413@megazone.bigpanda.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Tue, 9 Dec 2003, Brendan Jurd wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I read on the manual page for Inheritance that:
>
> "A limitation of the inheritance feature is that indexes (including
> unique constraints) and foreign key constraints only apply to single
> tables, not to their inheritance children. Thus, in the above example,
> specifying that another table's column REFERENCES cities(name) would
> allow the other table to contain city names but not capital names. This
> deficiency will probably be fixed in some future release."
>
> I have a few projects that could benefit from inherited table structure,
> and it's a very cool idea, but this inability of indexes to include
> derived tables is a real functionality-killer. It's not "Object
> Relational" if the objects can't be related to anything!
>
> If someone could give me an idea of how far away this fix is, I'd be
> grateful.

I'd say at least 1, probably more versions out. Unique constraints across
an inheritance tree are pretty much a requirement for inherited foreign
keys and I'm not planning to even start thinking about the foreign key
side until after unique's done.

As a note, there are workarounds for foreign keys that have been mentioned
in the past. I'm not really sure anyone's post a real good workaround for
unique though.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stephan Szabo 2003-12-08 22:29:24 Re: Inheritance and foreign keys
Previous Message Nigel J. Andrews 2003-12-08 22:26:00 Re: Manual record locking