Re: Perhaps an idiotic question

Neo wrote:
> ...
> I think you are saying, since a table is defined after its columns are
> defined, this leads to a catch-22 situation if a column needs to
> reference the table it is in which hasn't been defined yet. Would one
> way around this be, to create the table without the column and then add
> it later?
>

I didn't mean that. I think it is possible to define both at once.

p Received on Thu Nov 30 2006 - 03:52:32 CET