Drake Wilson wrote: > > Quoth Frank Millman <fr...@chagford.com>, on 2010-10-20 > 11:47:06 +0200: > > Ok, thanks. > > > > Is there any chance of it being considered for a future release? > > Search http://www.sqlite.org/cvstrac/wiki?p=SqliteWikiFaq for "foreign > key". >
Thanks, Drake. I found the following quote, which I assume is what you were referring to - "The same goes for foreign key constraints. There are severe implementation difficulties trying to get this to work across separate database. If you have a foreign key in a separate database, that really argues that the two databases ought to be one." I can understand that. For the record, I will explain what I am doing, in case someone can suggest an alternative approach. If not, I can live with it. I am writing a generalised business/accounting application, which is multi-company. I have got it working using MS SQL Server and PostgreSQL as databases, and now I want to add sqlite3 as a third option, for small single-user systems and for demo purposes. In the first two DBMS's, I use the concept of a 'schema' to represent the different companies. They are all in the same database, but I can refer to individual tables using 'schema.tablename' notation. sqlite3 does not seem to have the equivalent of a schema in the same sense as the other two, but I have got close by using the concept of separate databases. So far this is the first time I have bumped my head. If this is the only restriction, I can live with it. The link above refers to a similar restriction with 'triggers', but at this stage I am only making limited use of triggers, and not cross-company, so hopefully that will not become a problem. If I find more problems, I may have to reconsider my options. I hope not, as I am really enjoying working with sqlite3. Frank _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
