Inheritance vs child tables (Was Domains)
От | Francisco J Reyes |
---|---|
Тема | Inheritance vs child tables (Was Domains) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20030802140600.G99004@zoraida.natserv.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Domains (Was [PERFORM] Views With Unions) (Ron Johnson <ron.l.johnson@cox.net>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
On Fri, 1 Aug 2003, Ron Johnson wrote: > On Fri, 2003-08-01 at 12:26, Francisco J Reyes wrote: > > On Fri, 1 Aug 2003, Tom Lane wrote: > [snip] > > Currently I used inheritance to enforce the consitency > > since a good number of fields needed to be common among the tables AND the > > inheritted tables are basically a supperset of the data, so some times I > > would want to access the inheritted tables and other times the parent/main > > table. > > Isn't this when you'd really want child tables, instead? I think both ways can accomplish the same (if not very simmilar functionality), however I find using inherittance easier. Not really sure about efficiency though. A simple example of the type of design I am planning to do would be: Table A Userid date entered last changed Table B inherited from A(additional fields) person name birthday Table C inherited from A(additional fields) book isbn comment I plan to keep track of how many records a user has so with inherittance it's easy to do this. I can count for the user in Table A and find out how many records he/she has or I can count in each of the inheritted tables and see how many there are for that particular table. Inheritance makes it easier to see everything for a userid or just a particular type of records.
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: