From: Jamie Tufnell <diesql@googlemail.com>
To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Composite UNIQUE across two tables?
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 16:09:08 +0000
Message-ID: <b0a4f3350803070809x9da3b74oeaa20a75c2d14936@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200803062322.27911.jgodoy@gmail.com>
References: <b0a4f3350803061104s89656bcl739e1aa1cdcb6e3a@mail.gmail.com>
<CMEFJOLLJJDJKKLGEJJMGEJDCAAA.ray@madigans.org>
<b0a4f3350803061710y2d3391cdwa54d7dcf4af5692f@mail.gmail.com>
<200803062322.27911.jgodoy@gmail.com>
Hi Jorge,
On 3/7/08, Jorge Godoy <jgodoy@gmail.com> wrote:
> Em Thursday 06 March 2008 22:10:14 Jamie Tufnell escreveu:
> > I'm not sure how I would enforce that the site_group_id
> > added to the users table would correspond correctly with
> > the site_id (as per the sites table). Perhaps I would make a
> > composite foreign key?
>
> Or you manage site_group_id from a trigger. When the user creates / chooses
> a site_id and updates/inserts this information then you fill site_group_id
> with a trigger. This way you guarantee the correctness of this parameter.
Hmm. So your advice would be to duplicate the
site_group_id field into the users table as well?
That looks to be the consensus.. so I'm not sure why it feels
like I'm doing something wrong :-)
Thanks for your input!
J.
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: diesql@googlemail.com
Subject: Re: Composite UNIQUE across two tables?
In-Reply-To: <b0a4f3350803070809x9da3b74oeaa20a75c2d14936@mail.gmail.com>
* 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