Re: Table Updates ..

From: Rudi Starcevic <rudi(at)oasis(dot)net(dot)au>
To: pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Table Updates ..
Date: 2003-03-12 04:07:50
Message-ID: 3E6EB296.4020800@oasis.net.au
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-sql

Josh,

Thanks for that.
You're suggestion is how I currently have it.
However some other's had doubted my method and suggested the logging
table(s).
Keeping is simple is much better.

Thanks again.
Regards
Rudi.

Josh Berkus wrote:

>Rudi,
>
>
>
>>If I have 3 tables :
>>
>>orders,
>>products,
>>orders_products ( join table for orders and products )
>>
>>If I insert an order with two products I have:
>>
>>2 rows in the products table, ( the two products )
>>1 row in the orders table and ( one order )
>>2 rows in the orders_products table. ( two products for this order )
>>
>>So far so good. All that works well.
>>But what if next week one the the products in the products table is
>>updated and changed ?
>>Then my order from last week is now different -- corrupted. It links to
>>the same product_id but the product is changed.
>>
>>
>
>If you're concerned with "freezing" the product characteristics at the time of
>the order, the answer is to add all or most of the columns in the products
>table to orders_products. Then, at the time of order finalization
>(shipping? not sure) you copy those columns from products to order_products.
>
>If you're into ORDMBS, you could even create orders_products as inheriting
>products. But this isnt' required.
>
>This will work better than a monthly log.
>
>
>

In response to

Browse pgsql-sql by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stephan Szabo 2003-03-12 04:42:42 Re: converting time_t to timestamp?
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2003-03-12 03:57:23 Re: Table Updates ..