Re: [PATCH] Support for Array ELEMENT Foreign Keys
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [PATCH] Support for Array ELEMENT Foreign Keys |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 5081B2D3.3070604@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [PATCH] Support for Array ELEMENT Foreign Keys (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [PATCH] Support for Array ELEMENT Foreign Keys
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 10/19/2012 03:55 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > This thought also crystallizes something else that had been bothering me, > which is that "ELEMENT" alone is a pretty bad choice of syntax because > it entirely fails to make clear which of these semantics is meant. > I'm tempted to propose that we use > > FOREIGN KEY (foo, EACH ELEMENT OF bar) REFERENCES ... > > which is certainly more verbose than just "ELEMENT" but I think it > makes it clearer that each array element is required to have a match > separately. If we ever implemented the other behavior it could be > written as "ANY ELEMENT OF". > > That doesn't get us any closer to having a working column-constraint > syntax unfortunately, because EACH is not a reserved word either > so "EACH ELEMENT REFERENCES" still isn't gonna work. I'm getting > more willing to give up on having a column-constraint form of this. > > "ALL" is a fully reserved keyword. Could we do something like "ALL ELEMENTS"? cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: