Re: Table with Field Serial - Problem

From: Francisco Olarte <folarte(at)peoplecall(dot)com>
To: Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Yostin Vargas <yostinv(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Table with Field Serial - Problem
Date: 2013-11-02 11:58:25
Message-ID: CA+bJJbw5tTBpChfAKPAOgK5H1c0a5Cfva9zUyVapBRDCq697JQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 5:13 PM, Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Table1
>> Column | Type | Modifiers
>>
>> ----------+-------------------__+-----------------------------__------------------------------__--
>>
>> id | integer | not null default
>> nextval('test_table_id_fld___seq'::regclass)
>>
>>
>> Table2
>> Column | Type | related
>>
>> ----------+-------------------__+-----------------------------__------------------------------__--
>>
>> id_table1 | integer | FK of Table1.id
>> id_lang | integer | FK of lang.id <http://lang.id>
>> name | varchar
>>
>
> I may be having one of my dumb moments, but what does the above accomplish
> that including the serial column in Table2 does not?

The default constraint puzzles me a bit, but you can have duplicate
values in table2 and check they are in t1. Imagine something like
this. You store message ids and translations. When a new message is
needed you insert it into t1, put this id wherever it's needed, and
comunicate the id to the translators, which then can insert the
translations in t2 at their pace. It has it uses.

Francisco Olarte.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Adrian Klaver 2013-11-02 14:07:23 Re: Table with Field Serial - Problem
Previous Message DT 2013-11-02 05:33:06 Why release index relation lock