Re: [GENERAL] child table doesn't inherit PRIMARY KEY?

On Wed, 24 Jan 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:

>
> OK, what do people want to do with this item? Add to TODO list?
>
> Seems making a separat unique constraint would be easy to do and be of
> value to most users.

The problem is that doing that will pretty much guarantee that we won't
be doing foreign keys to inheritance trees without changing that behavior
and we've seen people asking about adding that too. I think that this
falls into the general category of "Make inheritance make sense" (Now
there's a todo item :) ) Seriously, I think the work on how inheritance
is going to work will decide this, maybe we end up with a real inheritance
tree system and something that works like the current stuff in which case
I'd say it's probably one unique for the former and one per for the
latter.