On Ôñé 30 Áðñ 2013 20:25:42 Wolfgang Keller wrote: > > (there is nothing wrong in getting your hands dirty with pl/pgsql btw) > > The point is that I would have expected that problem to be solved > within the past four decades since relational databases have been > invented. Or at least in the past two decades since PostgreSQL has been > developed. >
Then what about n>1, n>2, n>k where k an arbitrarily large positive integer? isn't it the same problem class actually? Is there any serious database vendor who provides out of the box support for 1:n, n>0 ? Or is it an "unusual" user requirement in the first place. Ever thought why not so many people have asked for this? Anyway, IMHO, the need for more programming/programmers increases with the years, engineering becomes more complex, you can't expect serious contgrol in anything without getting under the hood. > >;-> > > After all, this should be really an ultra-classic-standard FAQ item. > > I'm definitely not the first database user in the world who needs to > have a 1:n relationship with n>0 and integrity enforced by the > database. > > Sincerely, > > Wolfgang > > > - Achilleas Mantzios IT DEV IT DEPT -- Sent via pgsql-sql mailing list (pgsql-sql@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-sql
