On Tue, Dec 14, 2004 at 02:06:24 +0200, Ciprian Popovici <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm in a situation where it would be useful to bind a field in a table via > foreign keys to N other tables simultaneously. The table holds a common > type of info which all those other tables use. The many tables refer to the > common table by keeping references to its serial field. > > By doing this, I could ensure that when a row in any of the many tables is > deleted or updated, the effect travels to the common table. > > So far, I've been successful in defining more than one foreign key on the > same field in the lone table, tied to fields in different tables. (I half > expected it not to work though). > > However, it seems that inserting values in the commons table is a > showstopper: it expects that field value to exists not in only one, but in > ALL bound tables simultaneously.
Are you sure you don't really want the foreign key relation to go in the other direction? ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
