Re: Foreign key to a view (UNION of two or more tables), any alternative?

On Sun, Jun 19, 2005 at 17:16:34 +0100,
  Jose Gonzalez Gomez <jgonzalez.openinput@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> There would be no problem in doing so with such an easy case, but
> think about having a table with cities (hundred, thousands?) and then
> have four copies for each of the above posibilities with its related
> maintenance nightmare.

You still have to maintain the data somehow. I think it would be
easier with more cities to have a table holding the results rather
than try to hard code something into the table definition.