On Tue, 9 Dec 2003, Jan Wieck wrote:
> Stephan Szabo wrote:
> > On Tue, 9 Dec 2003, Brendan Jurd wrote:
> >
> > As a note, there are workarounds for foreign keys that have been mentioned
> > in the past. I'm not really sure anyone's post a real good workaround for
> > unique though.
>
> Wouldn't a central table just holding the unique key values and
> maintained by rules/triggers from all the tables in the inheritance tree
> do the trick?
>
> That central table would be the referenced one too then, because it
> contains the union of all keys.
That's the general thing for the fks and I guess the insert into the
central table should have the correct behavior in concurrent calls as
well.