I'm recently trying to drop Doctrine due to performance and problems with abstraction and move to database driven logic. I'm using mostly PostgreSQL.
Doctrine
One thing that I liked about Doctrine was inheritance, which I used for multiple roles in web app. There is base table/class Person and every role (for example admin, developer, user) extends this class. All users share one base table, so it helps to keep unique login/idenfiticator (in my case it's email). But getting person's info from doctrine resulted in final class, with all it's properties. For example:
$user = $em->getRepository('Entities\Person')->findOneBy(array('email' => 'john.doe#example.com'));
if ( $user instanceof Entities\Developer) {
...
}
Nice feature, but when having many roles, resulting SQL query was very ineffective, selecting from base class left joining all roles and then by defined discriminator mapper builded final class from base table and final table.
PostgreSQL
I discovered that postgres has implemented table inheritance and it works well. But I'd like to simulate Doctrine's behaviour, getting role from db (without knowing it's role and therefore it's final table).
For better examples, my tables look like this:
--
-- base people table
--
CREATE TABLE people
(
id serial NOT NULL,
first_name character varying(25) NOT NULL,
last_name character varying(25) NOT NULL,
email character varying(50) NOT NULL,
"password" character varying(150),
CONSTRAINT people_pkey PRIMARY KEY (id)
);
--
-- role developer (does not have any role specific info)
--
CREATE TABLE developer
(
-- Inherited from table people: id integer NOT NULL DEFAULT nextval('people_id_seq'::regclass),
-- Inherited from table people: first_name character varying(25) NOT NULL,
-- Inherited from table people: last_name character varying(25) NOT NULL,
-- Inherited from table people: email character varying(50) NOT NULL,
-- Inherited from table people: "password" character varying(150),
CONSTRAINT developer_pkey PRIMARY KEY (id)
)
INHERITS (people);
--
-- role user
--
CREATE TABLE installer
(
-- Inherited from table people: id integer NOT NULL DEFAULT nextval('people_id_seq'::regclass),
-- Inherited from table people: first_name character varying(25) NOT NULL,
-- Inherited from table people: last_name character varying(25) NOT NULL,
-- Inherited from table people: email character varying(50) NOT NULL,
client character varying(50),
-- Inherited from table people: "password" character varying(150),
CONSTRAINT installer_pkey PRIMARY KEY (id)
)
INHERITS (people);
Solution 1 -> 2 queries
It's quite simple to find out role from base table people and then select directly from role's table:
-- returns name of table (and role) 'developer'
SELECT pg.relname
FROM people p, pg_class pg
WHERE pg.oid=p.tableoid and p.email = 'john.doe#example.com';
-- getting roles full info
SELECT *
FROM developer
WHERE email = 'kracmar#dannax.sk';
This solution is fine, but I was searching for nicer solution.
Solution 2 -> 1 query using procedure
It would be nice to get info about user in just single query. I went deep into docs of functions and dig something out, but couldn't reach finish. I thought that using return query would be way, but my problem is that I need to specify type of result to function, but it can change depending on user's role (different table with number of columns and types).
This is one of results, function returns record but it's not query, single column with all fields in it separated with comma.
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION get_person_by_email(person_email VARCHAR)
RETURNS record
LANGUAGE plpgsql
STABLE STRICT AS
$BODY$
DECLARE
role varchar;
result record;
BEGIN
SELECT pg.relname
INTO role
FROM people p,
pg_class pg
WHERE pg.oid=p.tableoid
AND p.email = person_email;
IF NOT FOUND THEN
RAISE exception 'Person with email % does not exists.', person_email;
END IF;
CASE
WHEN role = 'developer' THEN
SELECT *
INTO result
FROM developer
WHERE email = person_email;
WHEN ROLE = 'installer' THEN
SELECT *
INTO result
FROM installer
WHERE email = person_email;
END CASE;
RETURN result;
END;
$BODY$;
Selecting from this function is no go as there is missing columns definition. Maybe I complicate things and should use solution 1, but that way I won't learn anything. Any help will be appreciated.
I suppose you might be interested in zyxist's Doctrine2 fork:
Fork of Doctrine 2 Object Relational Mapper aiming to create real table inheritance support for PostgreSQL
You can read more on author's blog.
Related
I'm trying to implement an Audit table design in PostgreSQL, where I have different types of user id's that can be audited.
Let's say I have a table named admins (which belong to an organization), and table superadmins (which don't).
CREATE TABLE example.organizations (
id SERIAL UNIQUE,
company_name varchar(50) NOT NULL UNIQUE,
phone varchar(20) NOT NULL check (phone ~ '^[0-9]+$')
);
and an example of a potential admin design
CREATE TABLE example.admins (
id serial primary_key,
admin_type varchar not null,
#... shared data
check constraint admin_type in ("super_admins", "regular_admins")
);
CREATE TABLE example.regular_admins (
id integer primary key,
admin_type varchar not null default "regular_admins"
organization_id integer references example.organizations(id),
#... other regular admin fields
foreign key (id, admin_type) references example.admins (id, admin_type),
check constraint admin_type = "regular_admins"
);
CREATE TABLE example.super_admins (
id integer primary key,
admin_type varchar not null default "super_admins"
#... other super admin fields
foreign key (id, admin_type) references example.admins (id, admin_type),
check constraint admin_type = "super_admins"
);
Now an audit table
CREATE TABLE audit.organizations (
audit_timestamp timestamp not null default now(),
operation text,
admin_id integer primary key,
before jsonb,
after jsonb,
);
This calls for inheritance or polymorphism at some level, but I'm curious about how to design it. I've heard that using PostgreSQL's inheritance functionality is not always a great way to go, although I'm finding it to fit this use case.
I'll need to be able to reference a single admin id in the trigger that updates the audit table, and it would be nice to be able to get the admin information when selecting from the audit table without using multiple queries.
Would it be better to use PostgreSQL inheritance or are there other ideas I haven't considered?
I wouldn't say that it calls for inheritance or polymorphism. Admins and superadmins are both types of user, whose only difference is that the former belong to an organization. You can represent this with a single table and a nullable foreign key. No need to overcomplicate matters. Especially if you're using a serial as your primary key type: bad things happen if you confuse admin #2 for superadmin #2.
I'm currently using the pq lib for Go to communicate with my PostgreSQL database. Error checking is proving to be a little more difficult than anticipated. The easiest way to describe my question is through an example scenario.
Imagine a web form:
Username ________
Email ________
Voucher ________
Password ________
A rough schema:
username VARCHAR(255) UNIQUE NOT NULL,
email VARCHAR(255) UNIQUE NOT NULL,
voucher VARCHAR(255) UNIQUE NOT NULL,
password VARCHAR(255) NOT NULL
Ignore the presumed plain text password for now. If a person submits the form, I can do all of my validation to verify constraints such as length/allowed characters/etc.
Now it comes to putting it in the database, so we write a prepared statement and execute it. If the validation was done correctly, the only thing that can really go wrong is the UNIQUE constraints. In the event that someone attempts to enter an existing username, database/sql is going to fire back an error.
My problem is that I have no idea what to do with that error and recover from (what should be) a recoverable error. pq provides some support for this, but there still appears to be come ambiguity to what's returned.
I can see two solutions, neither of which sound particularly appealing to me:
A SERIALIZABLE transaction which checks every single form value prior to insertion. Alternatively, some form of parsing on the pq error struct.
Is there a common pattern for implementing such a system? I'd like to be able to say to a user Sorry that username exists rather than Sorry something bad happened
As a sidenote, the PostgreSQL documentation states:
The fields for
schema name, table name, column name, data type name, and constraint
name are supplied only for a limited number of error types; see
Appendix A.
but the linked page isn't very helpful with respect to values returned in the database object.
If the validation was done correctly, the only thing that can really go wrong is the UNIQUE constraints.
No, the client could lack sufficient privileges, the client might have entered a valid password that's not the right password, the client might have entered a valid voucher that belongs to a different client, etc.
Using "A SERIALIZABLE transaction which checks every single form value prior to insertion" doesn't make sense. Just insert data, and trap errors.
At the very least, your code needs to examine and respond to the C (Code) field, which is always present in the error struct. You don't need to parse the error struct, but you do need to read it.
If you violate a unique constraint, PostgreSQL will return SQL state 23505 in the Code field. It will also return the name of the first constraint that's violated. It doesn't return the column name, probably because a unique constraint can include more than one column.
You can select the column(s) the constraint refers to by querying the information_schema views.
Here's a simple version of your table.
create table test (
username VARCHAR(255) UNIQUE NOT NULL,
email VARCHAR(255) UNIQUE NOT NULL,
voucher VARCHAR(255) UNIQUE NOT NULL,
password VARCHAR(255) NOT NULL
);
insert into test values ('msherrill', 'me#example.com', 'a', 'wibble');
This quick and dirty go program inserts the same row again. It violates every unique constraint.
package main
import (
"github.com/lib/pq"
"database/sql"
"fmt"
"log"
)
func main() {
db, err := sql.Open("postgres", "host=localhost port=5435 user=postgres password=xxxxxxxx dbname=scratch sslmode=disable")
if err != nil {
log.Fatal(err)
}
rows, err := db.Exec("insert into public.test values ('msherrill', 'me#example.com', 'a', 'wibble');")
if err, ok := err.(*pq.Error); ok {
fmt.Println("Severity:", err.Severity)
fmt.Println("Code:", err.Code)
fmt.Println("Message:", err.Message)
fmt.Println("Detail:", err.Detail)
fmt.Println("Hint:", err.Hint)
fmt.Println("Position:", err.Position)
fmt.Println("InternalPosition:", err.InternalPosition)
fmt.Println("Where:", err.Where)
fmt.Println("Schema:", err.Schema)
fmt.Println("Table:", err.Table)
fmt.Println("Column:", err.Column)
fmt.Println("DataTypeName:", err.DataTypeName)
fmt.Println("Constraint:", err.Constraint)
fmt.Println("File:", err.File)
fmt.Println("Line:", err.Line)
fmt.Println("Routine:", err.Routine)
}
fmt.Println(rows)
}
Here's the output.
Severity: ERROR
Code: 23505
Message: duplicate key value violates unique constraint "test_username_key"
Detail: Key (username)=(msherrill) already exists.
Hint:
Position:
InternalPosition:
Where:
Schema: public
Table: test
Column:
DataTypeName:
Constraint: test_username_key
File: nbtinsert.c
Line: 406
Routine: _bt_check_unique
You have the schema, table, and constraint names. You presumably know the database (catalog) name, too. Use these values to select the schema, table, and column names from information_schema views. You're lucky; in this case you need only one view.
select table_catalog, table_schema, table_name, column_name
from information_schema.key_column_usage
where
table_catalog = 'scratch' and -- Database name
table_schema = 'public' and -- value returned by err.Schema
table_name = 'test' and -- value returned by err.Table
constraint_name = 'test_username_key' -- value returned by err.Constraint
order by constraint_catalog, constraint_schema, constraint_name, ordinal_position;
Using PostgreSQL 9.2.4, I have a table users with a 1:many relation to the table user_roles. The users table stores both employees and other kinds of users.
Table "public.users"
Column | Type | Modifiers
-----------------+-------------------+-----------------------------------------------------
uid | integer | not null default nextval('users_uid_seq'::regclass)
employee_number | character varying |
name | character varying |
Indexes:
"users_pkey" PRIMARY KEY, btree (uid)
Referenced by:
TABLE "user_roles" CONSTRAINT "user_roles_uid_fkey" FOREIGN KEY (uid) REFERENCES users(uid)
Table "public.user_roles"
Column | Type | Modifiers
-----------+-------------------+------------------------------------------------------------------
id | integer | not null default nextval('user_roles_id_seq'::regclass)
uid | integer |
role | character varying | not null
Indexes:
"user_roles_pkey" PRIMARY KEY, btree (id)
Foreign-key constraints:
"user_roles_uid_fkey" FOREIGN KEY (uid) REFERENCES users(uid)
I want to ensure that the column users.employee_number cannot be NULL if there is a related row where user_roles.role_name contains an employee role name. That is, I want the database to enforce the constraint that for some roles, users.employee_number must have a value, but not for others.
How can I accomplish this, preferably without user-defined functions or triggers? I found (blog post, SO Answer) that SQL Server supports indexed views, which sounds like it would serve my purpose. However, I assume that materialized views will not work in my case, since they are not dynamically updated.
Clarifications
The formulation of this requirement leaves room for interpretation:
where UserRole.role_name contains an employee role name.
My interpretation:
with an entry in UserRole that has role_name = 'employee'.
Your naming convention is was problematic (updated now). User is a reserved word in standard SQL and Postgres. It's illegal as identifier unless double-quoted - which would be ill-advised. User legal names so you don't have to double-quote.
I am using trouble-free identifiers in my implementation.
The problem
FOREIGN KEY and CHECK constraint are the proven, air-tight tools to enforce relational integrity. Triggers are powerful, useful and versatile features but more sophisticated, less strict and with more room for design errors and corner cases.
Your case is difficult because a FK constraint seems impossible at first: it requires a PRIMARY KEY or UNIQUE constraint to reference - neither allows NULL values. There are no partial FK constraints, the only escape from strict referential integrity are NULL values in the referencing columns due to the default MATCH SIMPLE behavior of FK constraints. Per documentation:
MATCH SIMPLE allows any of the foreign key columns to be null; if any
of them are null, the row is not required to have a match in the referenced table.
Related answer on dba.SE with more:
Two-column foreign key constraint only when third column is NOT NULL
The workaround is to introduce a boolean flag is_employee to mark employees on both sides, defined NOT NULL in users, but allowed to be NULL in user_role:
Solution
This enforces your requirements exactly, while keeping noise and overhead to a minimum:
CREATE TABLE users (
users_id serial PRIMARY KEY
, employee_nr int
, is_employee bool NOT NULL DEFAULT false
, CONSTRAINT role_employee CHECK (employee_nr IS NOT NULL = is_employee)
, UNIQUE (is_employee, users_id) -- required for FK (otherwise redundant)
);
CREATE TABLE user_role (
user_role_id serial PRIMARY KEY
, users_id int NOT NULL REFERENCES users
, role_name text NOT NULL
, is_employee bool CHECK(is_employee)
, CONSTRAINT role_employee
CHECK (role_name <> 'employee' OR is_employee IS TRUE)
, CONSTRAINT role_employee_requires_employee_nr_fk
FOREIGN KEY (is_employee, users_id) REFERENCES users(is_employee, users_id)
);
That's all.
These triggers are optional but recommended for convenience to set the added tags is_employee automatically and you don't have to do anything extra:
-- users
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION trg_users_insup_bef()
RETURNS trigger AS
$func$
BEGIN
NEW.is_employee = (NEW.employee_nr IS NOT NULL);
RETURN NEW;
END
$func$ LANGUAGE plpgsql;
CREATE TRIGGER insup_bef
BEFORE INSERT OR UPDATE OF employee_nr ON users
FOR EACH ROW
EXECUTE PROCEDURE trg_users_insup_bef();
-- user_role
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION trg_user_role_insup_bef()
RETURNS trigger AS
$func$
BEGIN
NEW.is_employee = true;
RETURN NEW;
END
$func$ LANGUAGE plpgsql;
CREATE TRIGGER insup_bef
BEFORE INSERT OR UPDATE OF role_name ON user_role
FOR EACH ROW
WHEN (NEW.role_name = 'employee')
EXECUTE PROCEDURE trg_user_role_insup_bef();
Again, no-nonsense, optimized and only called when needed.
SQL Fiddle demo for Postgres 9.3. Should work with Postgres 9.1+.
Major points
Now, if we want to set user_role.role_name = 'employee', then there has to be a matching user.employee_nr first.
You can still add an employee_nr to any user, and you can (then) still tag any user_role with is_employee, irregardless of the actual role_name. Easy to disallow if you need to, but this implementation does not introduce any more restrictions than required.
users.is_employee can only be true or false and is forced to reflect the existence of an employee_nr by the CHECK constraint. The trigger keeps the column in sync automatically. You could allow false additionally for other purposes with only minor updates to the design.
The rules for user_role.is_employee are slightly different: it must be true if role_name = 'employee'. Enforced by a CHECK constraint and set automatically by the trigger again. But it's allowed to change role_name to something else and still keep is_employee. Nobody said a user with an employee_nr is required to have an according entry in user_role, just the other way round! Again, easy to enforce additionally if needed.
If there are other triggers that could interfere, consider this:
How To Avoid Looping Trigger Calls In PostgreSQL 9.2.1
But we need not worry that rules might be violated because the above triggers are only for convenience. The rules per se are enforce with CHECK and FK constraints, which allow no exceptions.
Aside: I put the column is_employee first in the constraint UNIQUE (is_employee, users_id) for a reason. users_id is already covered in the PK, so it can take second place here:
DB associative entities and indexing
First, you can solve this using a trigger.
But, I think you can solve this using constraints, with just a little weirdness:
create table UserRoles (
UserRoleId int not null primary key,
. . .
NeedsEmployeeNumber boolean not null,
. . .
);
create table Users (
. . .
UserRoleId int,
NeedsEmployeeNumber boolean,
EmployeeNumber,
foreign key (UserRoleId, NeedsEmployeeNumber) references UserRoles(UserRoleId, NeedsEmployeeNumber),
check ((NeedsEmployeeNumber and EmployeeNumber is not null) or
(not NeedsEmployeeNumber and EmployeeNumber is null)
)
);
This should work, but it is an awkward solution:
When you add a role to an employee, you need to add the flag along with the role.
If a role is updated to change the flag, then this needs to be propagated to existing records -- and the propagation cannot be automatic because you also need to potentially set EmployeeNumber.
New Answer:
This( SQL Sub queries in check constraint ) seems to answer your question, and the language is still in the 9.4 documentation( http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.4/interactive/sql-createtable.html ).
Old Answer:
SELECT
User.*
, UserRole1.*
FROM
User
LEFT JOIN UserRole UserRole1
ON User.id = UserRole1.UserId
AND (
(
User.employee_number IS NOT NULL AND UserRole1.role_name IN (enumerate employee role names here)
)
OR
(User.employee_number IS NULL)
)
The above query selects all fields from User and all fields from UserRole(aliased as UserRole1). I assumed that the key field between the two fields is known as User.id and UserRole1.UserId, please change these to whatever the real values are.
In the JOIN part of the query there is an OR that on the left side requires an employee number not be NULL in the user table and that UserRole1.role_name be in a list that you must supply to the IN () operator.
The right part of the JOIN is the opposite, it requires that User.employee_number be NULL(this should be your non-employee set).
If you require a more exact solution then please provide more details on your table structures and what roles must be selected for employees.
I have a question about implementing inheritance in postgresql(9.1).
The purpose is to build a geo-hierarchy model, where countries, states and continents can be mixed up to create "regions". And then these
regions too can be mixed up with the countries, etc. to create a truly awesome region-hierarchy
So in my logical model, everything is a type of "place". A region-tree can be constructed by specifying edgewise using the two "places". The design is as below, and easy to manage in the Java layer.
create table place_t (
place_id serial primary key,
place_type varchar(10)
);
create table country_t (
short_name varchar(30) unique,
name varchar(255) null
) inherits(place_t);
create table region_t(
short_name varchar(30),
hierarchy_id integer, -- references hierarchy_t(hierarchy_id)
unique(short_name) -- (short_name,hierarchy_id)
) inherits(place_t);
create table region_hier_t(
parent integer references place_t(place_id), -- would prefer FK region_t(place_id)
child integer references place_t(place_id),
primary key(parent,child)
);
insert into region_t values(DEFAULT, 'region', 'NA', 'north american ops');
insert into region_t values(DEFAULT, 'region', 'EMEA', 'europe and middle east');
insert into country_t values(DEFAULT, 'country', 'US', 'USD', 'united states');
insert into country_t values(DEFAULT, 'country', 'CN', 'CND', 'canada');
So far so good. But the following fails:
insert into region_hier_t
select p.place_id, c.place_id
from region_t as p, country_t as c
where p.short_name = 'NA' and c.short_name = 'US';
The reason is that the first 4 inserts did not create any row in "place_t". RTFM! Postgres docs actually mention this.
The question is - is there a workaround? Via insert triggers on region_t and country_t to implement my own "inheritance" is the only thing I could think of.
A second question is - is there a better design for such a mixed-node tree structure?
For certain reasons I do not want to rely too much on postgres-contrib features. Perhaps that's very silly and please feel free to chime in, but gently (and only after answering the other question)!
Thanks
References on parent and child column in region_hier_t table are wrong, because you cannot insert a key from country_t if your reference calls another table (child integer references place_t(place_id)); You can either drop them or add new ones.
So let's take the second option and add an unique constraint matching given keys for referenced tables region_t and country_t:
ALTER TABLE region_t
ADD CONSTRAINT pk_region_t PRIMARY KEY(place_id );
ALTER TABLE country_t
ADD CONSTRAINT pk_country_t PRIMARY KEY(place_id );
The correct CREATE statement for region_hier_t is:
create table region_hier_t(
parent integer references region_t(place_id),
child integer references country_t(place_id),
primary key(parent,child)
);
And finally you can run your INSERT.
So, as you see there is many improvements for you to do. Maybe you should reconsider your design. Take a look at this answer: How to store postal addresses and political divisions in a normalized way? It's much simpler than your solution and easier to maintain.
But if you wanna stay by your solution don't forget to set primary keys on child tables(as shown above). Only check constraints and not-null constraints are inherited by its children and you haven't done it already.
I see that other of your insert don't work correctly:
insert into region_t values(DEFAULT, 'region', 'NA', 'north american ops');
ERROR: invalid input syntax for integer: "north american ops"
LINE 1: ...ert into region_t values(DEFAULT, 'region', 'NA', 'north ame...
So there is problem with column assignment as well.
So it turns out that inheritance in PostgreSQL is somewhat different from that used in typical OOP languages. In particular, the "superclass" table is not populated automatically. If I had to use my own triggers to do that, I didn't have a use case left for the inheritance structure.
So I abandoned Postgresql inheritance and created my own "place_t" table. And "country_t", "state_t", "county_t" and "region_t" children tables, linked to parent "place_t" through "place_id".
On these children tables, I created an before insert/update row level trigger to ensure that "place_id" refers to a valid row in "place_t" and the reference is not changed later. IOW, "place_id" in children tables should behave like write-once-read-many.
Now, I can insert the world geo. Also, define a new "region". I created a "region_composition_t" to record the edges of a regional hierarchy, the parent being a reference to "region_t" and child being a reference to "place_t".
So far so good. The challenge now is how to suppress any update/delete cascading effects.
The workaround is to get rid of your foreign keys to place_t and do instead:
CREATE FUNCTION place_t_exists(id int)
RETURNS bool LANGUAGE SQL AS
$$
SELECT count(*) = 1 FROM place_t;
$$;
CREATE FUNCTION fkey_place_t() RETURNS TRIGGER
LANGUAGE PLPGSQL AS $$
BEGIN;
IF place_t_exists(TG_ARGV[1]) THEN RETURN NEW
ELSE RAISE EXCEPTION 'place_t does not exist';
END IF;
END;
$$;
You also need something on the child tables to restrain when the hierarchy node exists:
CREATE FUNCTION hierarchy_exists(id int) RETURNS BOOL LANGUAGE SQL AS
$$
SELECT COUNT(*) > 0 FROM region_heir_t WHERE parent = $1 or child = $1;
$$;
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION fkey_hierarchy_trigger() RETURNS trigger LANGUAGE PLPGSQL AS
$$
BEGIN
IF hierarchy_exists(old.place_id) THEN RAISE EXCEPTION 'Hierarchy node still exists';
ELSE RETURN OLD;
END;
$$;
Then you can create your triggers:
CREATE CONSTRAINT TRIGGER fkey_place_parent AFTER INSERT OR UPDATE TO region_hier_t
FOR EACH ROW EXECUTE PROCEDURE fkey_place_t(new.parent);
CREATE CONSTRAINT TRIGGER fkey_place_child AFTER INSERT OR UPDATE TO region_hier_t
FOR EACH ROW EXECUTE PROCEDURE fkey_place_t(new.child);
And then for each of the place_t child tables:
CREATE CONSTRAINT TRIGGER fkey_hier_t TO [child_table]
FOR EACH ROW EXECUTE PROCEDURE fkey_hierarchy_trigger();
This solution may not be worth it, but it is worth knowing how to do it if you need to.
I have a table like:
CREATE TABLE test(
id integer not null default nextval('test_id_seq'::regclass),
client_name_id integer not null
);
Foreign-key constraints:
"test_client_name_id_fkey" FOREIGN KEY (client_name_id) REFERENCES company(id) DEFERRABLE INITIALLY DEFERRED
and company table:
CREATE TABLE company(
id integer not null default nextval('company_id_seq'::regclass),
company_name character varying(64) not null
)
Now I have trigger on test table which fetch id from company table using provided value client_name_id which is string by matching it with company_name. but when I insert record PostgreSQL return error that client_name_id is string and int required which is true.
How can I tell PostgreSQL not to verify inserted row as I have taken care of it in my triggers.
What you are trying to do is very unorthodox. Are you sure, this is what you want? Of course, you cant enter a string (with non-digits) into an integer column. No surprise there, right? If you want to enter the text instead, you'd have to add a text column instead - with a fk-constraint to company(company_name) if you want to match your current layout.
ALTER TABLE test ALTER DROP COLUMN client_name_id; -- drops fk constraint, too
ALTER TABLE test ADD COLUMN client_name REFERENCES company(company_name);
You would need a UNIQUE constraint on company.company_name to allow this.
However, I would advise to rethink your approach. Your table layout seems proper as it is. The trigger is the unconventional element. Normally, you would reference the primary key, just like you have it now. No trigger needed. To get the company name, you would join the table in a SELECT:
SELECT *
FROM test t
JOIN company c ON t.client_name_id = c.id;
Also, these non-standard modifiers should only be there if you need them: DEFERRABLE INITIALLY DEFERRED. Like, when you have to enter values in table test before you enter the referenced values in table company (in the same transaction).