pg.ddx.io pgsql-sql@postgresql.org mailing list archive
help / color / mirror / Atom feedinheritance
18+ messages / 15 participants
[nested] [flat]
* inheritance
@ 1998-05-29 18:09 Bernhard Matthias Ertl <ertl@delos.dbs.informatik.uni-muenchen.de>
1998-05-29 18:58 ` Re: [SQL] inheritance Oliver Elphick <olly@lfix.co.uk>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: Bernhard Matthias Ertl @ 1998-05-29 18:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-sql
Hi,
only two short questions:
+ does the postgresql 6.2.1 already support inheritance and
+ if I have the tables cities and capitals (like in the tutorial), how can
I add attributes of a city to a capital? Before the capital attributes,
after the capital attributes or do I have to insert a capital citiy into
the table city as well as into the table capital?
Thanx, Bernhard
*********************************************************************
* Bernhard Matthias Ertl * email: ertl@bigfoot.com *
* Calslaan 1-107 * *
* NL-7522 MH Enschede * ertl@edupsy.uni-muenchen.de *
* Tel: ++31 53 489 5001 * *
*********************************************************************
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [SQL] inheritance
1998-05-29 18:09 inheritance Bernhard Matthias Ertl <ertl@delos.dbs.informatik.uni-muenchen.de>
@ 1998-05-29 18:58 ` Oliver Elphick <olly@lfix.co.uk>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Oliver Elphick @ 1998-05-29 18:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bernhard Matthias Ertl <ertl@delos.dbs.informatik.uni-muenchen.de>; +Cc: pgsql-sql
Bernhard Matthias Ertl wrote:
>Hi,
>
>only two short questions:
>+ does the postgresql 6.2.1 already support inheritance and
>+ if I have the tables cities and capitals (like in the tutorial), how can
>I add attributes of a city to a capital? Before the capital attributes,
>after the capital attributes or do I have to insert a capital citiy into
>the table city as well as into the table capital?
A descendant automatically inherits all attributes from its ancestor(s).
Try \d and see.
--
Oliver Elphick Oliver.Elphick@lfix.co.uk
Isle of Wight http://www.lfix.co.uk/oliver
PGP key from public servers; key ID 32B8FAA1
========================================
"Let no man despise thy youth; but be thou an example
of the believers, in word, in conversation, in
charity, in spirit, in faith, in purity."
I Timothy 4:12
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 18+ messages in thread
* Inheritance
@ 1998-11-21 06:21 anil <anil@server.awcoldstream.com>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: anil @ 1998-11-21 06:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-sql
Hi All,
I have a fields for customer:
cusId int4 - customer ID Unique number
cusName text - Customer Name
cusPrice int4 - Customer pricing scheme
cusAdd text - Customer Address
cusCity text - customer city
cusProv text - Customer city
cusZip text - Customer zip
I am using first three fields on a order window lot and I use all fields
on the customer information Window.
if i create two tables::
table scustomer -> (cusid int4 primary key, cusName text, cus
cusPrice)
lcustomer -> (cusAdd text , cusCity text, cusProv text
,cusZip text ) inherits (scustomer)
so I could use
select cusId,cusName,cusPrice from lcustomer;
or
select * from from scustomer*;
which query is going to faser???? or is there anyway that I insert some
rows into lcustomer table and get result on corrosponding fields on
scustomer table??
I have tried this:
insert into lcustomer(1234,'My
customer',10,'Myaddress',Mycity','Myprov','Myzip');
select * from lcustomer;
1234 | My customer | 10 | Myaddress | Mycity
| Myprov | Myzip
select * from scustomer;
zero rows;
select * from scustomer*;
1234 | My customer | 10
what do you mean by - Append (cost=0.0 size=0 width=0) on the out put of
explain select * from scustomer*;
Thank you
Anil
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 18+ messages in thread
* inheritance
@ 1999-05-04 13:27 Ingrith Andrea Correa Vargas <i-correa@uniandes.edu.co>
1999-05-05 05:12 ` Re: [SQL] inheritance Chris Bitmead <chris.bitmead@bigfoot.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: Ingrith Andrea Correa Vargas @ 1999-05-04 13:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-sql
Hello all!
I have a doubt: It´s possibble to insert a record in a child table and to
have the same record inserted in the parent automatically?!...like
inheritance is...
TYhank you in advance,
Ingrith Correa :)
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [SQL] inheritance
1999-05-04 13:27 inheritance Ingrith Andrea Correa Vargas <i-correa@uniandes.edu.co>
@ 1999-05-05 05:12 ` Chris Bitmead <chris.bitmead@bigfoot.com>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Chris Bitmead @ 1999-05-05 05:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-sql
Ingrith Andrea Correa Vargas wrote:
>
> Hello all!
>
> I have a doubt: It´s possibble to insert a record in a child table and to
> have the same record inserted in the parent automatically?!...like
> inheritance is...
I'm not sure exactly what you mean. If you insert a record into a child
table and then you go SELECT * from parent*
(note the last "*") then you get both parent and child data from the one
query. Is that what you realy want or do you mean something else?
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 18+ messages in thread
* RE: [SQL] inheritance
@ 1999-05-05 04:58 Michael J Davis <michael.j.davis@tvguide.com>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Michael J Davis @ 1999-05-05 04:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 'Ingrith Andrea Correa Vargas' <i-correa@uniandes.edu.co>; pgsql-sql
You could use a trigger or a rule. Please see the documentation for
details. With a trigger you could look to see if the parent record existed
before inserting it.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ingrith Andrea Correa Vargas [SMTP:i-correa@uniandes.edu.co]
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 1999 7:27 AM
To: pgsql-sql@postgreSQL.org
Subject: [SQL] inheritance
Hello all!
I have a doubt: It´s possibble to insert a record in a child table
and to
have the same record inserted in the parent automatically?!...like
inheritance is...
TYhank you in advance,
Ingrith Correa :)
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 18+ messages in thread
* inheritance
@ 1999-07-21 13:21 Chris Bitmead <chris@tech.com.au>
1999-07-21 14:59 ` Re: [HACKERS] inheritance Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: Chris Bitmead @ 1999-07-21 13:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; pgsql-sql; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
I've been reading up on what Informix and Oracle provide in the way of
object support.
In particular I noticed that in Informix when you SELECT on a table it
by default includes all the objects of sub-classes. In other words the
"*" is postgres terms is always there by default. If you just want that
class only you have to say ONLY(tablename).
To me this is a much better idea. In any proper OO application you would
be using the "*" in postgres 99% of the time - that being the whole
point of OO. Does any consideration want to be given to making the same
change while there's not too many people using the inheritance feature?
I realise breaking compatibility is bad, but I think this is the Right
Thing. When you say "SELECT * FROM animal" it's reasonable that you be
returned all elephants. To not return them is pretty strange for the
uninitiated.
The other thing Informix does is automatically propagate all attributes
including indexes, constraints, pretty much everything to sub-classes.
Again.. I think this is the right thing. Any thoughts?
As for Oracle 8i, as far as I can tell it provides no support for
inheritance whatsoever. The docs themselves say "Oracle doesn't support
inheritance". It's a bit rich really to call it Oracle "object" in any
shape or form.
--
Chris Bitmead
mailto:chris@tech.com.au
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [HACKERS] inheritance
1999-07-21 13:21 inheritance Chris Bitmead <chris@tech.com.au>
@ 1999-07-21 14:59 ` Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
1999-07-21 16:26 ` Re: [HACKERS] inheritance Hannu Krosing <hannu@trust.ee>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: Tom Lane @ 1999-07-21 14:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chris Bitmead <chris@tech.com.au>; +Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; pgsql-sql; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Chris Bitmead <chris@tech.com.au> writes:
> To me this is a much better idea. In any proper OO application you would
> be using the "*" in postgres 99% of the time - that being the whole
> point of OO. Does any consideration want to be given to making the same
> change while there's not too many people using the inheritance feature?
What makes you think there's "not too many people" using inheritance?
Furthermore, if we did that it would break the code of people who
*didn't* think they were using inheritance, except as a means of
copying table definitions (which I do a lot, btw).
I don't think we can reverse the default on that at this late date.
> The other thing Informix does is automatically propagate all attributes
> including indexes, constraints, pretty much everything to sub-classes.
> Again.. I think this is the right thing. Any thoughts?
I'd be inclined to agree on that, or at least say that we ought to
provide a simple way of making it happen. But the right semantics
are not always obvious. For example, if the ancestor has a SERIAL
column, do the derived tables get their own sequence objects or
share the ancestor's? Does your answer change if the serial column
was created "by hand" with a "DEFAULT nextval('some_sequence')" clause?
I suspect that any way we jump on this sort of question will be wrong
for some apps, so it should be possible to suppress system copying of
attributes...
regards, tom lane
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [HACKERS] inheritance
1999-07-21 13:21 inheritance Chris Bitmead <chris@tech.com.au>
1999-07-21 14:59 ` Re: [HACKERS] inheritance Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
@ 1999-07-21 16:26 ` Hannu Krosing <hannu@trust.ee>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Hannu Krosing @ 1999-07-21 16:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>; +Cc: Chris Bitmead <chris@tech.com.au>; pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org; pgsql-sql; pgsql-general@postgreSQL.org
Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Chris Bitmead <chris@tech.com.au> writes:
> > To me this is a much better idea. In any proper OO application you would
> > be using the "*" in postgres 99% of the time - that being the whole
> > point of OO.
And considering that the Informix OO is probably really
Illustra/Postgres OO,
this is most likely what PostgreSQL was meant to do in the first place.
> > Does any consideration want to be given to making the same
> > change while there's not too many people using the inheritance feature?
>
> What makes you think there's "not too many people" using inheritance?
The poor shape the PostgreSQL inheriatnce (and OO in general) is in ?
> Furthermore, if we did that it would break the code of people who
> *didn't* think they were using inheritance, except as a means of
> copying table definitions (which I do a lot, btw).
This use is to real inheritance as (MS win) cooperative multitasking
is to real multitasking; when you stick to it too much, you will
never have the real one.
> I don't think we can reverse the default on that at this late date.
Maybe we should then need some other construct for _real_ inheritance?
A keyword like EXTENDS or something.
What does ANSI SQL3 say on inheritance?
> > The other thing Informix does is automatically propagate all attributes
> > including indexes, constraints, pretty much everything to sub-classes.
> > Again.. I think this is the right thing. Any thoughts?
>
> I'd be inclined to agree on that, or at least say that we ought to
> provide a simple way of making it happen. But the right semantics
> are not always obvious. For example, if the ancestor has a SERIAL
> column, do the derived tables get their own sequence objects or
> share the ancestor's?
The ancestors sequence of course (ain't I smart <grin> ;)
> Does your answer change if the serial column
> was created "by hand" with a "DEFAULT nextval('some_sequence')" clause?
It should not, else the column would not be _relly_ inherited.
And as we do not have any way change any constraits/defaults after table
creation this problem could be postponed to some later date.
btw, is ALTER TABLE ADD/DROP CONSTRAINT, and changing column defaults
planned for 6.6 ?
OTOH, I'm not sure if DROP TABLE should also drop all inherited tables
too?
My guess is that it should by default (disabled by ONLY ?) - what does
Informix do?
> I suspect that any way we jump on this sort of question will be wrong
> for some apps, so it should be possible to suppress system copying of
> attributes...
maybe we should have a TEMPLATE in addition to INHERITS ?
>
> regards, tom lane
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 18+ messages in thread
* Inheritance
@ 2000-05-30 10:16 Christophe Labouisse <labouiss@cybercable.fr>
2000-05-30 10:41 ` Re: Inheritance Peter Eisentraut <e99re41@DoCS.UU.SE>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: Christophe Labouisse @ 2000-05-30 10:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-sql
I have a table (A) with a few "sibbling" tables (B and C for
instance). When I make the following query : select id from A* where
[condition] pgsql returns ids taken from A, B or C (which is what I
want). Is there a way to know to what table the id actually belong ?
--
Le cinéma en Lumière : http://www.lumiere.org/
Fingerprint : 4721 651D D309 B302 93E4 5D73 CC52 DF3A E7C7 86CF
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Inheritance
2000-05-30 10:16 Inheritance Christophe Labouisse <labouiss@cybercable.fr>
@ 2000-05-30 10:41 ` Peter Eisentraut <e99re41@DoCS.UU.SE>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Peter Eisentraut @ 2000-05-30 10:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christophe Labouisse <labouiss@cybercable.fr>; +Cc: pgsql-sql
On 30 May 2000, Christophe Labouisse wrote:
> I have a table (A) with a few "sibbling" tables (B and C for
You probably mean "child" tables.
> instance). When I make the following query : select id from A* where
> [condition] pgsql returns ids taken from A, B or C (which is what I
> want). Is there a way to know to what table the id actually belong ?
No. We're kind of pondering a way to solve this. However, according to the
SQL99 data model, the row is shared between A and B or C respectively, so
when you select from a* then you get rows from "a", period. I know this
doesn't help in practice, though.
--
Peter Eisentraut Sernanders väg 10:115
peter_e@gmx.net 75262 Uppsala
http://yi.org/peter-e/ Sweden
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: inheritance
@ 2007-03-08 20:25 chester c young <chestercyoung@yahoo.com>
2007-03-08 21:46 ` Re: inheritance Shane Ambler <pgsql@Sheeky.Biz>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: chester c young @ 2007-03-08 20:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-sql
> --- Greg Toombs <greg.toombs@bluebottle.com> wrote:
>
>
> I'm trying to figure out how to nicely implement a C++
class-likesystem > > with PostgreSQL. Consider the following:
>
> Tables Fruit, Apple, Orange
you can do this traditionally or through pg inheritance, although I do
not think inheritance is well supported before 8.2.
from years of experience the easiest approach and aesthetically the
least satisfying approach is to put everything into the fruit table
create table fruit(
fruit_id integer primary key,
fruit_tp varchar(12),
...
);
with this approach you simply deal with whatever column's your
interested in - with apples the orange specific columns are dead wood -
they don't get in the way and take up no storage - you just need to
learn to ignore them, maybe using views to help.
you can have a fruit table plus apple and orange tables.
create table fruit(
fruit_id integer primary key,
<common attributes>
)
create table apple(
apple_id integer primary key,
fruit_id integer not null references fruit,
<apple attributes>
)
you then need to build views to join fruit with apple and oranges,
because some of the apple attributes are in the fruit table.
lastly you need to handle dml. for example, when you insert an apple
you need to insert into the fruit and the apple table. this can be
done either through your application bracketing your dml with a begin
and commit, or can be done through rules (much, much cooler) (the doc
on rules will hold your hand through this).
____________________________________________________________________________________
Finding fabulous fares is fun.
Let Yahoo! FareChase search your favorite travel sites to find flight and hotel bargains.
http://farechase.yahoo.com/promo-generic-14795097
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: inheritance
2007-03-08 20:25 Re: inheritance chester c young <chestercyoung@yahoo.com>
@ 2007-03-08 21:46 ` Shane Ambler <pgsql@Sheeky.Biz>
2007-03-08 22:11 ` Re: inheritance Richard Broersma Jr <rabroersma@yahoo.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: Shane Ambler @ 2007-03-08 21:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: chester c young <chestercyoung@yahoo.com>; +Cc: pgsql-sql; greg.toombs@bluebottle.com
chester c young wrote:
>> --- Greg Toombs <greg.toombs@bluebottle.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> I'm trying to figure out how to nicely implement a C++
> class-likesystem > > with PostgreSQL. Consider the following:
>> Tables Fruit, Apple, Orange
>
> you can do this traditionally or through pg inheritance, although I do
> not think inheritance is well supported before 8.2.
Inheritance will most likely fit your C++ class-like system better and
will not need foreign keys. Inheritance has been available in postgresql
for many years and I think you will find it quite stable. (Not sure if
pg6.x had it but it was available in 7.x) Historically a Table in
postgresql was called a class (pre-sql) which is still reflected in the
system catalogs with pg_class containing the list of tables and other
classes like indexes....
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.2/interactive/ddl-inherit.html
You would then have table fruit as your base class and table oranges
that inherits from fruit, giving it all the columns that fruit has plus
any that are added to table oranges as well.
selecting from table fruit will allow you to get all rows from table
apples and table oranges but not the columns unique to the apples or
oranges tables.
Maybe then you'll add a table basket that has a foreign key to the fruit
table....... ;-)
--
Shane Ambler
pgSQL@Sheeky.Biz
Get Sheeky @ http://Sheeky.Biz
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: inheritance
2007-03-08 20:25 Re: inheritance chester c young <chestercyoung@yahoo.com>
2007-03-08 21:46 ` Re: inheritance Shane Ambler <pgsql@Sheeky.Biz>
@ 2007-03-08 22:11 ` Richard Broersma Jr <rabroersma@yahoo.com>
2007-03-08 22:20 ` Re: inheritance chester c young <chestercyoung@yahoo.com>
2007-03-09 00:50 ` Re: inheritance Shane Ambler <pgsql@Sheeky.Biz>
0 siblings, 2 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Richard Broersma Jr @ 2007-03-08 22:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Shane Ambler <pgsql@Sheeky.Biz>; chester c young <chestercyoung@yahoo.com>; +Cc: pgsql-sql; greg.toombs@bluebottle.com
>
> Maybe then you'll add a table basket that has a foreign key to the fruit
> table....... ;-)
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: inheritance
2007-03-08 20:25 Re: inheritance chester c young <chestercyoung@yahoo.com>
2007-03-08 21:46 ` Re: inheritance Shane Ambler <pgsql@Sheeky.Biz>
2007-03-08 22:11 ` Re: inheritance Richard Broersma Jr <rabroersma@yahoo.com>
@ 2007-03-08 22:20 ` chester c young <chestercyoung@yahoo.com>
2007-03-08 22:27 ` Re: inheritance Richard Broersma Jr <rabroersma@yahoo.com>
1 sibling, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: chester c young @ 2007-03-08 22:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard Broersma Jr <rabroersma@yahoo.com>; pgsql-sql
--- Richard Broersma Jr <rabroersma@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > Maybe then you'll add a table basket that has a foreign key to the
> fruit
> > table....... ;-)
>
> From the inheritance link:
> ...
> A serious limitation of the inheritance feature is that ...
it's my understanding that inheritance has become much stronger in 8.2,
although it still only inherits parts of the table. when primary keys
and triggers are inherited then I'll be in heaven - until then rules
rule.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for earth-friendly autos?
Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center.
http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: inheritance
2007-03-08 20:25 Re: inheritance chester c young <chestercyoung@yahoo.com>
2007-03-08 21:46 ` Re: inheritance Shane Ambler <pgsql@Sheeky.Biz>
2007-03-08 22:11 ` Re: inheritance Richard Broersma Jr <rabroersma@yahoo.com>
2007-03-08 22:20 ` Re: inheritance chester c young <chestercyoung@yahoo.com>
@ 2007-03-08 22:27 ` Richard Broersma Jr <rabroersma@yahoo.com>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Richard Broersma Jr @ 2007-03-08 22:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: chester c young <chestercyoung@yahoo.com>; pgsql-sql
>
> it's my understanding that inheritance has become much stronger in 8.2,
> although it still only inherits parts of the table.
True. But from what I understand, the only new feature that was added to table-inheritance was the
ability to ALTER a table so that it inherits another table. Before this, I think table
inheritance could only be created from the CREATE TABLE statement.
Regards,
Richard Broersma Jr.
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: inheritance
2007-03-08 20:25 Re: inheritance chester c young <chestercyoung@yahoo.com>
2007-03-08 21:46 ` Re: inheritance Shane Ambler <pgsql@Sheeky.Biz>
2007-03-08 22:11 ` Re: inheritance Richard Broersma Jr <rabroersma@yahoo.com>
@ 2007-03-09 00:50 ` Shane Ambler <pgsql@Sheeky.Biz>
1 sibling, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Shane Ambler @ 2007-03-09 00:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard Broersma Jr <rabroersma@yahoo.com>; +Cc: chester c young <chestercyoung@yahoo.com>; pgsql-sql; greg.toombs@bluebottle.com
Richard Broersma Jr wrote:
>> Maybe then you'll add a table basket that has a foreign key to the fruit
>> table....... ;-)
>
>>From the inheritance link:
> ...
> A serious limitation of the inheritance feature is that indexes (including unique constraints) and
> foreign key constraints only apply to single tables, not to their inheritance children. This is
> true on both the referencing and referenced sides of a foreign key constraint.
> ...
>
> You can create a foreign key to the fruit table to a table basket, but this foreign key will only
> work for fruit that was directly inserted into the fruit table. Any fruit inserted into the
> Apples or Oranges table can not be referenced by the table basket. I believe that this limitation
> in table inheritance will not work for Greg's requirements.
>
>
> Having said this, it would make me very happy if I am wrong. I hate modeling data the hard way
> when there is a better way of doing it. ;)
You can get and store related records but the issue is that you need to
maintain referential integrity yourself instead of postgresql doing it
for you.
So currently your right, next release or two maybe not. There is a
current discussion (on hackers list) on partitioning that has been going
over ways to tackle the primary / unique constraints across multiple
child tables and that could lead to a solution that can be applied to
this as well.
Partitioning is using inheritance to spread data across multiple tables.
eg you may have one table for each month's worth of data.
--
Shane Ambler
pgSQL@Sheeky.Biz
Get Sheeky @ http://Sheeky.Biz
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 18+ messages in thread
* inheritance
@ 2010-03-17 12:33 Zdravko Balorda <zdravko.balorda@siix.com>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Zdravko Balorda @ 2010-03-17 12:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-sql
Hi,
I am new to postgress inheritance.
Once a parent row is inserted can I later
reconnect child rows so that thay get
adopted by parent row?
Regards, Zdravko.
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 18+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2010-03-17 12:33 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages (download: mbox mbox.gz follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
1998-05-29 18:09 inheritance Bernhard Matthias Ertl <ertl@delos.dbs.informatik.uni-muenchen.de>
1998-05-29 18:58 ` Oliver Elphick <olly@lfix.co.uk>
1998-11-21 06:21 Inheritance anil <anil@server.awcoldstream.com>
1999-05-04 13:27 inheritance Ingrith Andrea Correa Vargas <i-correa@uniandes.edu.co>
1999-05-05 05:12 ` Chris Bitmead <chris.bitmead@bigfoot.com>
1999-05-05 04:58 RE: [SQL] inheritance Michael J Davis <michael.j.davis@tvguide.com>
1999-07-21 13:21 inheritance Chris Bitmead <chris@tech.com.au>
1999-07-21 14:59 ` Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
1999-07-21 16:26 ` Hannu Krosing <hannu@trust.ee>
2000-05-30 10:16 Inheritance Christophe Labouisse <labouiss@cybercable.fr>
2000-05-30 10:41 ` Re: Inheritance Peter Eisentraut <e99re41@DoCS.UU.SE>
2007-03-08 20:25 Re: inheritance chester c young <chestercyoung@yahoo.com>
2007-03-08 21:46 ` Shane Ambler <pgsql@Sheeky.Biz>
2007-03-08 22:11 ` Richard Broersma Jr <rabroersma@yahoo.com>
2007-03-08 22:20 ` chester c young <chestercyoung@yahoo.com>
2007-03-08 22:27 ` Richard Broersma Jr <rabroersma@yahoo.com>
2007-03-09 00:50 ` Shane Ambler <pgsql@Sheeky.Biz>
2010-03-17 12:33 inheritance Zdravko Balorda <zdravko.balorda@siix.com>
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox