Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: unique constraints on foreign keys

From: Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone(dot)bigpanda(dot)com>
To: Jaime Casanova <systemguards(at)yahoo(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: unique constraints on foreign keys
Date: 2004-09-20 23:27:50
Message-ID: 20040920162457.D84638@megazone.bigpanda.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-adminpgsql-general
On Mon, 20 Sep 2004, Jaime Casanova wrote:

>  --- Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone(dot)bigpanda(dot)com>
> escribi:
> >
> > On Mon, 20 Sep 2004, Jaime Casanova wrote:
> >
> > > There is a way to not enforce the creation of a
> > > primary or unique index on a referenced table?
> >
> > Not really. It's not the index that's important
> > per-se, it's the uniqueness that is implied.
>
> OK. What about to teach the planner always do a
> seq on that table and do not ask for use the
> index? but not using "set" instructions. can i do
> that?

Not really. Are you worried about the cost of doing the plan analysis for
the index scan or that it might choose to actually use the index?
Theoretically, it's only going to currently plan the fk scan on status
once per connection because that plan should be saved.

In response to

pgsql-admin by date

Next:From: Robert TreatDate: 2004-09-21 06:20:35
Subject: Re: Postgres setup question
Previous:From: Jaime CasanovaDate: 2004-09-20 23:18:52
Subject: Re: unique constraints on foreign keys

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: Mark HarrisonDate: 2004-09-21 00:13:30
Subject: Re: using database for queuing operations?
Previous:From: Jaime CasanovaDate: 2004-09-20 23:18:52
Subject: Re: unique constraints on foreign keys

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group