| From: | Curt Sampson <cjs(at)cynic(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Arguile <arguile(at)lucentstudios(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: abuse of inheritance? |
| Date: | 2002-07-12 11:24:13 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.NEB.4.44.0207122022150.411-100000@angelic.cynic.net |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Thu, 11 Jul 2002, Arguile wrote:
> Curt Sampson writes:
> >
> > So I'm ok with relational theory, I think, and I know OO pretty
> > well, at least from a programmer's viewpoint.
> >
> > But I'm unsure about this table inheritance thing. What is the advantage
> > of using inheritance over having a staff table with the staff columns
> > and a FK into the contact table? What are the disadvantages? Can anyone
> > point to some literature on this?
>
> "The Third Manifesto" by CJ Date and Hugh Darwen is a great text for
> exploring Object Relational ideas.
Yes, I've got that book, as well as the _Guide to the SQL Standard_
and many of Date's other books.
However, the appendex in T3M that deals with table inheritance can be
summarized as, "It's a stupid idea which can be implemented just as well
with a view, anyway." I tend to agree with this, but I was looking for
a contrary opinion to evaluate.
cjs
--
Curt Sampson <cjs(at)cynic(dot)net> +81 90 7737 2974 http://www.netbsd.org
Don't you know, in this new Dark Age, we're all light. --XTC
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Frank Joerdens | 2002-07-12 11:28:50 | providing feedback about query progress to the client app |
| Previous Message | Richard Huxton | 2002-07-12 10:51:03 | Re: syncronizing databases |