Similar to this question here - Postgres creating a Table with an array of foreign keys
Any update on this situation, or even a new beta with this feature??
-
Why do you need this (except for catalogs) ? Why not add an extra 1:N table instead?joop– joop2016-08-11 09:58:56 +00:00Commented Aug 11, 2016 at 9:58
-
We already have a 1:N table in place, however we see little use in repeating several records just for the sake of changing the value in one column. It would be more efficient to have an array of ids which link to the other table instead.air6199– air61992016-08-11 10:09:34 +00:00Commented Aug 11, 2016 at 10:09
-
Someone have some updates?Romper– Romper2017-03-03 10:14:01 +00:00Commented Mar 3, 2017 at 10:14
Add a comment
|
1 Answer
it was proposed for Google Summer of code 2017 (https://summerofcode.withgoogle.com/archive/2017/projects/6341409154007040/) and it seems to be slowly moving in the right direction.
the current patch has still a lot of limitations and no quite ready to be merged, but hey it's a good sign.
latest update was 2017-11-13 about doing some un-easy refactoring of the code.
