Re: Unique or Primary Key?
От | Eric G. Miller |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Unique or Primary Key? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20010502185009.D4206@calico.local обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Unique or Primary Key? (pgsql@itsbruce.uklinux.net) |
Ответы |
Re: Unique or Primary Key?
|
Список | pgsql-general |
On Thu, May 03, 2001 at 12:58:03AM +0100, pgsql@itsbruce.uklinux.net wrote: > This table is man-in-the-middle of a many-to-many relationship: > > CREATE TABLE cv_entries ( > subscriber INTEGER NOT NULL > REFERENCES subscribers > ON DELETE CASCADE > ON UPDATE CASCADE, > entry_type INTEGER NOT NULL > REFERENCES cv_entry_types > ON DELETE CASCADE > ON UPDATE CASCADE, > ordinal INTEGER, > value1 TEXT, > value2 TEXT, > minimum_trust SMALLINT, > UNIQUE(subscriber, entry_type, ordinal) > ); > > I used a unique index here because I couldn't see any reason for a > Primary Key - this table will always be searched on either the > subscriber or entry_type index. > > Was I wrong? Should this be a Primary Key? I think it's a distinction without a difference. A primary key is just a way to identify a unique tuple that's been chosen from a possible set of candidate keys (often there's only one candidate). And, primary keys are enforced with a unique index... -- Eric G. Miller <egm2@jps.net>
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: