Re: complex referential integrity constraints

From: "Joris Dobbelsteen" <Joris(at)familiedobbelsteen(dot)nl>
To: "Martijn van Oosterhout" <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>
Cc: "Robert Haas" <Robert(dot)Haas(at)dyntek(dot)com>, <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: complex referential integrity constraints
Date: 2007-02-22 17:51:49
Message-ID: 73427AD314CC364C8DF0FFF9C4D693FF5585@nehemiah.joris2k.local
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

>-----Original Message-----
>From: pgsql-general-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
>[mailto:pgsql-general-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] On Behalf Of
>Martijn van Oosterhout
>Sent: donderdag 22 februari 2007 18:17
>To: Joris Dobbelsteen
>Cc: Robert Haas; pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
>Subject: Re: [GENERAL] complex referential integrity constraints
>
>On Thu, Feb 22, 2007 at 05:28:35PM +0100, Joris Dobbelsteen wrote:
>> Even worse, I don't you can guarentee that this constraint
>is enforced
>> at all times. That means, not if you are using triggers.
>> The only option seems using foreign keys and put in a lot of
>redundant
>> data.
>
>Err, foreign keys are implemented using triggers, so this
>statement is self-contradictary.

Are you really sure they are executed under the same visibility rules?

- Joris

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tomas Simonaitis 2007-02-22 17:58:44 Moving WAL files
Previous Message Chad Wagner 2007-02-22 17:49:16 Re: postgresql vs mysql