Horton

Re: [PATCH] Support for foreign keys with arrays

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>

View thread
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Gabriele Bartolini <gabriele.bartolini@2ndquadrant.it>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>, Gianni Ciolli <gianni.ciolli@2ndquadrant.it>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Marco Nenciarini <marco.nenciarini@2ndquadrant.it>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>
Date: 2012-07-30T16:13:51Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Allow LEAKPROOF functions for better performance of security views.

  2. Improve labeling of pg_test_fsync open_sync test output.

On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 11:12 AM, Gabriele Bartolini
<gabriele.bartolini@2ndquadrant.it> wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
>    it is time to give another go to this patch. I would like to thank
> everyone for suggestions and ideas expressed through this list.
>
>    We are happy that "Part 0" of the patch has been committed
> (array_remove() and array_replace() functions), which will be useful in
> "Part 2" (too early now to talk about it). Let's not rush though and focus
> on "Part 1" of the patch. :)
>
>    First, I would like to find a unique and general term for this feature.
> We started with "Foreign keys with arrays" and ended up with "EACH foreign
> keys". Following Peter's suggestion, we will use the "ELEMENT" keyword (so
> that maybe in the future we can extend the usage). Our proposals are:
>
> * Array Foreign Key
> * Foreign Key Arrays
> * ELEMENT Foreign Keys
> * ...
>
>    Which one is your favourite?

I think having the word "element" in there makes it a lot clearer.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company