| From: | David Garamond <lists(at)zara(dot)6(dot)isreserved(dot)com> | 
|---|---|
| To: | jao(at)geophile(dot)com, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org | 
| Subject: | Re: Any reason not to use inheritance? | 
| Date: | 2004-09-21 05:45:45 | 
| Message-ID: | 414FC009.2060506@zara.6.isreserved.com | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general | 
jao(at)geophile(dot)com wrote:
> Any reason not to use inheritance?
Inheritance is certainly very useful/convenient especially for "table 
partitioning" (though not the same as in Oracle) and for modeling 
supertype-subtype stuffs.
The only drawback I see is that the implementation is still lacking in 
several area, e.g. no hierarchy-wide unique constraints, so you'll have 
to resort to triggers. And there doesn't seem to be many people using it 
at the moment, so if there were a bug then it might get fixed less quickly.
Ironically, the last sentence could be argued as the reason *to* use 
inheritance in Postgres, to get more people using and testing it. :-)
-- 
dave
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dennis Gearon | 2004-09-21 05:54:07 | basics on User Defined Functions | 
| Previous Message | Greg Sabino Mullane | 2004-09-21 03:08:03 | Re: psql + autocommit |