From: | "Campbell, Lance" <lance(at)illinois(dot)edu> |
---|---|
To: | "'pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org'" <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | 9.5 foreign schema |
Date: | 2015-11-20 14:44:53 |
Message-ID: | B75CD08C73BD3543B97E4EF3964B7D702014C829@CITESMBX1.ad.uillinois.edu |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
I am really excited about foreign schemas being available in 9.5 . I was testing this feature out and ran into a situation.
Issue:
I have a prod database called db1. I have two schemas, schema1 and schema2. I have two tables schema1.table1 and schema2.table2 . In my current production database a column within schema2.table2 has a foreign key constraint to schema1.table1 . If a record is deleted from schema1.table1 then the corresponding rows are deleted from schema2.table2 .
So I set up a new database on a different server called db2. I then set up a foreign schema on db2 that pointed to schema1 on db1. Then I loaded schema2 directly onto db2 in the hopes that all would work great.
Then I got an error message that said, 'ERROR: referenced relation "table1" is not a table'. I now am assuming I cannot have foreign keys pointing to tables within foreign schemas.
I guess that makes sense because if db1 was not available then db2 would start deleting data. Is that correct?
Is there a new way to handle foreign keys when using foreign tables?
Lance
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Williams, Alex | 2015-11-20 19:50:41 | Re: Question on Hot Standby in PostgreSQL |
Previous Message | John Scalia | 2015-11-20 12:46:50 | Re: Problem with pg_hba.conf |