Re: [HACKERS] RE: [GENERAL] Benchmarking PGSQL against Microsoft SQL 7 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Thomas G. Lockhart
Subject Re: [HACKERS] RE: [GENERAL] Benchmarking PGSQL against Microsoft SQL 7
Date
Msg-id 3697B70C.1A4CADD7@alumni.caltech.edu
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] RE: [GENERAL] Benchmarking PGSQL against Microsoft SQL 7  (Todd Graham Lewis <tlewis@mindspring.net>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] RE: [GENERAL] Benchmarking PGSQL against Microsoft SQL 7  (Todd Graham Lewis <tlewis@mindspring.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
> 2) Will PostgreSQL _ever_ have support for foreign keys?

Yes.

> That is the
> single biggest gripe around here at MindSpring. Lots of people use 
> psql and love it, myself included, but the lack of support for foreign 
> keys is so annoying that it boggles the mind.

Well, if it were *that* annoying someone would probably have fixed it up
by now. That's supposed to be one of the advantages of open source
software; you can "scratch your own itch" rather than having to wait for
others.

I used an Ingres database for years, which had neither foreign keys nor
outer joins. Did OK with it too. I had a choice of what to work on, and
I'm poking at outer joins (don't know if they will make the next release
yet though). Foreign keys weren't as interesting to me, so ...

> I know that you can simulate
> the behaviour using triggers, and so the question comes, why can't
> someone just hack the command syntax to translate the "foreign keys"
> directive into the appropriate trigger insertion?

That might be a good way to do it. Go fur it dude!

> I would be happier if the
> README just said "PostgreSQL does not and will never support the SQL
> 'FOREIGN KEYS' directive."

Liar :))
                    - Tom


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Todd Graham Lewis
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] RE: [GENERAL] Benchmarking PGSQL against Microsoft SQL 7
Next
From: Todd Graham Lewis
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] RE: [GENERAL] Benchmarking PGSQL against Microsoft SQL 7