From: Gianluca Riccardi <ml-reader@moonwatcher.it>
To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: DB design and foreign keys
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 11:26:55 +0100
Message-ID: <439FF36F.1040004@moonwatcher.it> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <439F1A23.40202@archonet.com>
References: <439F0FE8.1050503@moonwatcher.it>
<439F1A23.40202@archonet.com>
[cut]
>
> It means what it says. You have defined table orders with a primary
> key of (id,order_code). This means that the combination of
> (id,order_code) must be unique.
yes, that was my thought, and in that context, i thought it could be
correct in order to have uniqueness for creating foreign keys
> So - these could all exist at the same time:
> (1,1), (1,2), (2,1), (2,2)
> You could not then add another (1,2) combination.
yes, again, i thought that was the uniqueness i needed...
>
> Since id and order_code are both just automatically-generated numbers
> in the orders table it doesn't add anything to make both of them part
> of a primary-key. I would delete the id column altogether and just
> have the order_code as the primary-key (since "order_code" carries
> more meaning to a human than "id"). This means your order_items table
> can then safely reference the order_code it wants to.
> HTH
sure it did, thanks for your response, best regards,
Gianluca Riccardi
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Cc: ml-reader@moonwatcher.it
Subject: Re: DB design and foreign keys
In-Reply-To: <439FF36F.1040004@moonwatcher.it>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
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