Re: ADD FOREIGN KEY (was Re: [GENERAL] 7.4Beta)
От | Andreas Pflug |
---|---|
Тема | Re: ADD FOREIGN KEY (was Re: [GENERAL] 7.4Beta) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3F78B8A0.4050206@pse-consulting.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: ADD FOREIGN KEY (was Re: [GENERAL] 7.4Beta) (Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Greg Stark wrote: > > >>>>So a db designer made a bloody mistake. >>>> >>>> > >Not necessarily. If I'm never going to update or delete from the parent table >the index would be useless. I find very few of my foreign key relationships >actually need indexes on the child table. I usually only have the unique index >on the parent table. > >And often the child table is the big table. The index would be very large and >have awful selectivity. The last thing I want is a 5-million record table with >half a dozen indexes each with 10-20 unique values. > > > >>>>The problem is there's no easy way to find out what's missing. >>>>I'd really like EXPLAIN to display all subsequent triggered queries >>>>also, to see the full scans caused by missing indexes. >>>> >>>> >>>I'd sure second that! >>> >>> > >I think the root of problem here is the same as the root of the problem with >foreign key checks being slow for large batch updates and inserts. Namely that >foreign key constraint checks are being handled as a million small queries. > Apart from missing indices, this is certainly a problem. Statement level triggers will solve this, as soon as they are fully implemented and support OLD and NEW record sets. Regards, Andreas
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: