From: | Scott Ribe <scott_ribe(at)killerbytes(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Cyclic foreign key dependency & table inheritance - |
Date: | 2003-09-13 20:07:19 |
Message-ID: | BB88D517.32D96%scott_ribe@killerbytes.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Hmm. I read my examples over and over, but as soon as it was emailed back to
me I noticed a mistake ;-)
In the second example, I had foreign key references to the derived table,
like so:
create table transfer (
id int8 primary key,
origownedid int8 references owned deferrable not null,
newownedid int8 references owned deferrable not null
) without oids;
And that working correctly is consistent with the first example. Changing it
to:
create table transfer (
id int8 primary key,
origownedid int8 references base deferrable not null,
newownedid int8 references base deferrable not null
) without oids;
Gives the constraint violation error, also consistent with the first
example.
So the behavior is consistent and easily explainable. Now my question is
reduced to: is this really correct behavior? Should a foreign key constraint
referencing a base table really not be satisfied by a row of a table that
inherits from the referenced base table??? That seems wrong to me.
--
Scott Ribe
scott_ribe(at)killerbytes(dot)com
http://www.killerbytes.com/
(303) 665-7007 voice
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Richard Huxton | 2003-09-13 20:12:45 | Re: pgSql Memory footprint |
Previous Message | Scott Ribe | 2003-09-13 19:55:58 | Cyclic foreign key dependency & table inheritance |