Re: Work on Table Inheritance
От | elein@varlena.com (elein) |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Work on Table Inheritance |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20050216204359.GY21990@varlena.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Work on Table Inheritance (Eliot Simcoe <esimcoe@mac.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
That the children tables do not inherit these items is mostly by design, for better or worse. Many people take advantage of the indexes distribution across the tables and the ability to have triggers and keys different across the inheritance can be useful. This is a controversial subject. You should be familiar with the original intentions of the UC postgres project with regards to table inheritances as well as the well trodden arguments for and against pushing all of the features in the parent table into the children tables. For example, the is a Stonebraker not a Date implementation of table inheritance. --elein elein@varlena.com On Wed, Feb 16, 2005 at 07:22:39AM -0800, Eliot Simcoe wrote: > Hello everyone, > > I'm working on a project which makes extensive use of the PostgreSQL table inheritance features and am interested in fixingsome bugs I have come across. To my knowledge, triggers, primary keys, index, foreign key and unique constraints arenot inherited. I am more than willing to put the time into learning the PgSQL source tree and creating/submitting patchesto correct the above issues, but I need some help getting started. If there is anyone on the list familiar with thistopic who could point me in the right direction, I'll start asap. > > Thanks, > Eliot Simcoe > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend >
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: