Thread

1. Re: timestamp update field across multiple tables

   Oliver Elphick <olly@lfix.co.uk> — 2001-01-12T10:56:43Z

   Rajit Singh wrote:
     >I have five tables which are really intended to be one big table, but has be
         >en adapted to comply with Postgres's (irritating) 8kb tuple size limit (
         >ver 7.0.3).
     >
     >I have 'modtime' fields in each of these tables which record the last time a
         > record was updated.  But I would like the behaviour to be such that a m
         >odtime field in each of these associated tables is updated when any of t
         >he tables are updated.  And I would like all of the modtime fields to ta
         >ke the same value if possible.
   
   If the rows in these five tables are meant to be all one, why have five
   separate modtime fields?  That breaks the "rules" against redundant data.
   Just have it in one table and put triggers to set it in all five.
   
   -- 
   Oliver Elphick                                Oliver.Elphick@lfix.co.uk
   Isle of Wight                              http://www.lfix.co.uk/oliver
   PGP: 1024R/32B8FAA1: 97 EA 1D 47 72 3F 28 47  6B 7E 39 CC 56 E4 C1 47
   GPG: 1024D/3E1D0C1C: CA12 09E0 E8D5 8870 5839  932A 614D 4C34 3E1D 0C1C
                    ========================================
        "For the LORD is good; his mercy is everlasting; and 
         his truth endureth to all generations."         
                                        Psalms 100:5 
   
   
   
   

2. Re: timestamp update field across multiple tables

   Anthony E . Greene <agreene@pobox.com> — 2001-01-12T21:13:07Z

   On Fri, 12 Jan 2001 05:56:43 Oliver Elphick wrote:
   >Rajit Singh wrote:
   >>I have five tables which are really intended to be one big table, but
   >>has been adapted to comply with Postgres's (irritating) 8kb tuple size
   >>limit (ver 7.0.3).
   >>
   >>I have 'modtime' fields in each of these tables which record the last
   >>time a record was updated.  But I would like the behaviour to be such 
   >>that a modtime field in each of these associated tables is updated when 
   >>any of the tables are updated.  And I would like all of the modtime 
   >>fields to take the same value if possible.
   >
   >If the rows in these five tables are meant to be all one, why have five
   >separate modtime fields?  That breaks the "rules" against redundant data.
   >Just have it in one table and put triggers to set it in all five.
   
   Why not just have one modtime field in the main table and just include the
   primary key in the other tables? It sounds like you're going to include
   records from each table based on the primary key anyway. There is no need to
   duplicate the modtime field across the other table if the columns in these
   tables all actually represent a single record.
   
   -- 
   Anthony E. Greene <agreene@pobox.com> <http://www.pobox.com/~agreene/>
   PGP Key: 0x6C94239D/7B3D BD7D 7D91 1B44 BA26  C484 A42A 60DD 6C94 239D
   Chat:  AOL/Yahoo: TonyG05    ICQ: 91183266
   Linux. The choice of a GNU Generation. <http://www.linux.org/>