Re: inserting to a multi-table view
От | Richard Broersma |
---|---|
Тема | Re: inserting to a multi-table view |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 396486430809282143q65e985a3ifd147d8d4c1265fa@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: inserting to a multi-table view (Seb <spluque@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 5:31 PM, Seb <spluque@gmail.com> wrote: > I've read this thread with great interest as I'm coming to PostgreSQL > from the MS Access world of databases, where one can enter new data into > queries/forms and tables get automatically updated/deleted/inserted into > where expected. Well, I was able to get PostgreSQL Update-able views to work nearly as well as the update-able queries did in Access. In the case of update-able joined queries, I would expect that MS-Access had the advantage since it was using Pessimistic locking on native Access tables rather than the Optimistic locking that MS-Access uses on all ODBC linked tables. As a side note, you'll notice that MS-Access will not allow update-able queries based on ODBC linked table like it does on its native tables for this reason. > I'm also leaning towards using natural keys where possible and was > wondering how best to create multi-table views that can be > updated/deleted/inserted into. Natural Primary key/Foreign key CASCADE UPDATEs don't work well with update-able views. Choose one or the other. > Particularly, I'm > curious to learn how PostgreSQL database maintainers handle data > entry/modification requiring multi-table queries. Thanks. My opionion is that Multitable update-able views are not safe if you plan to allow multiple users concurrent access to the view. Because of this I scrapped these kinds of views for multiple prepared statements issued in a serializable level transaction. -- Regards, Richard Broersma Jr. Visit the Los Angeles PostgreSQL Users Group (LAPUG) http://pugs.postgresql.org/lapug
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: