| From: | ow <oneway_111(at)yahoo(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: 7.4 - FK constraint performance |
| Date: | 2004-02-13 01:22:53 |
| Message-ID: | 20040213012253.64419.qmail@web60807.mail.yahoo.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-sql |
--- Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Can't see how we optimize your case without pessimizing more-common cases.
My case appears to be pretty common, i.e. 1 small and 1 large table with RI
constraint between them. In order to delete a record from the small table, the
large table must not have records that are dependent on the deleted row.
I think other RDBMSs simply use preset value instead of partial table scan when
there's not enough stat info. Might be a better way.
Thanks
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online.
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2004-02-13 02:03:53 | Re: [HACKERS] Vacuum Delay feature |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-02-13 01:10:36 | Re: 7.4 - FK constraint performance |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ivo Anon | 2004-02-13 01:54:21 | nextval problem |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-02-13 01:10:36 | Re: 7.4 - FK constraint performance |