Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 518329
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 13, 20262026-05-13T07:55:34+00:00 2026-05-13T07:55:34+00:00

I have a table my_table with these fields: id_a, id_b. So this table basically

  • 0

I have a table my_table with these fields: id_a, id_b.
So this table basically can reference either an row from table_a with id_a, or an row from table_b with id_b. If I reference a row from table_a, id_b is NULL. If I reference a row from table_b, id_a is NULL.

Currently I feel this is my only/best option I have, so in my table (which has a lot more other fields, btw) I will live with the fact that always one field is NULL.

If you care what this is for: If id_a is specified, I’m linking to a “data type” record set in my meta database, that specifies a particular data type. like varchar(40), for example. But if id_b is specified, I’m linking to a relationship definition recordset that specifies details about an relationship (wheather it’s 1:1, 1:n, linking what, with which constraints, etc.). The fields are called a little bit better, of course 😉 …just try to simplify it to the problem.

Edit: If it matters: MySQL, latest version. But don’t want to constrain my design to MySQL specific code, as much as possible.

Are there better solutions?

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-13T07:55:34+00:00Added an answer on May 13, 2026 at 7:55 am

    A and B are disjoint subtypes in your model.

    This can be implemented like this:

    refs    (
            type CHAR(1) NOT NULL, ref INT NOT NULL,
            PRIMARY KEY (type, ref),
            CHECK (type IN ('A', 'B'))
            )
    
    table_a (
            type CHAR(1) NOT NULL, id INT NOT NULL,
            PRIMARY KEY (id),
            FOREIGN KEY (type, id) REFERENCES refs (type, id),
            CHECK (type = 'A'),
            …)
    
    table_b (
            type CHAR(1) NOT NULL, id INT NOT NULL,
            PRIMARY KEY (id),
            FOREIGN KEY (type, id) REFERENCES refs (type, id) ON DELETE CASCADE,
            CHECK (type = 'B'),
            …)
    
    mytable (
            type CHAR(1) NOT NULL, ref INT NOT NULL,
            FOREIGN KEY (type, ref) REFERENCES refs (type, id) ON DELETE CASCADE,
            CHECK (type IN ('A', 'B')),
            …)
    

    Table refs constains all instances of both A and B. It serves no other purpose except policing referential integrity, it won’t even participate in the joins.

    Note that MySQL accepts CHECK constraints but does not enforce them. You will need to watch your types.

    You also should not delete the records from table_a and table_b directly: instead, delete the records from refs which will trigger ON DELETE CASCADE.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Ask A Question

Stats

  • Questions 369k
  • Answers 369k
  • Best Answers 0
  • User 1
  • Popular
  • Answers
  • Editorial Team

    How to approach applying for a job at a company ...

    • 7 Answers
  • Editorial Team

    What is a programmer’s life like?

    • 5 Answers
  • Editorial Team

    How to handle personal stress caused by utterly incompetent and ...

    • 5 Answers
  • Editorial Team
    Editorial Team added an answer It seems the original author has found their solution, but… May 14, 2026 at 6:29 pm
  • Editorial Team
    Editorial Team added an answer You don't mention anything about multiple occurrences of the same… May 14, 2026 at 6:29 pm
  • Editorial Team
    Editorial Team added an answer how do I throw a textbox on the listing page… May 14, 2026 at 6:29 pm

Trending Tags

analytics british company computer developers django employee employer english facebook french google interview javascript language life php programmer programs salary

Top Members

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.