Re: Foreign key constraint with literal?

[Justin Taylor <jtaylor.0ab@xxxxxxxxx>]

So you're suggesting creating a view over every child table, and to change
every table reference to point to the new views?


date: Tue, 27 Apr 2021 15:08:22 -0700
> from: Peter Dow <petercdow@xxxxxxxxx>
> subject: Re: Foreign key constraint with literal?
>
> Hi Justin,
>
> I'm not sure what you mean by "get this to work".
>
> If a part becomes obsolete, I would think that you want to keep it on
> the PART_MASTER file, but not have it show up in PROMOTIONS, etc.
> Wouldn't a view handle that?
>
> Well, if I focus on the "I need the relationships to
> be(PART_MASTER.PART_NO = PROMOTIONS.PART_NO and PART_MASTER.OBSOLETE =
> '0')" then you could add a field to PROMOTIONS that is defined like the
> OBSOLETE flag in PART_MASTER, but always has a constant value of '0'.?
> Then the relationship would be
>
> PART_MASTER.PART_NO = PROMOTIONS.PART_NO and PART_MASTER.OBSOLETE =
> PROMOTIIONS.OBSOLETE
>
> Of course that's a lot of tables that need to be changed, but perhaps
> it's a simpler change than adding a trigger program.
>
> --
> *Peter Dow* /
> Dow Software Services, Inc.
> 909 793-9050
> petercdow@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:petercdow@xxxxxxxxx>
> pdow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:pdow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>