Re: foreign keys and RI triggers

From: Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone(dot)bigpanda(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: foreign keys and RI triggers
Date: 2005-05-26 16:05:54
Message-ID: 20050526090044.U7715@megazone.bigpanda.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


On Thu, 26 May 2005, Tom Lane wrote:

> Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> writes:
> > On Thu, 26 May 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> The thoughts I've had about special-casing RI events to save memory
> >> have to do with the idea of lossy storage.
>
> > One problem with that is that it works for the constraint check but not
> > for referential actions,
>
> True. But even fixing it only for constraint checks would be a win.

Yeah, I'm just wondering if going the extra step and forcing really really
immediate referential actions (even if that sometimes means adding a no
action trigger on the event as well) would be worth doing as that could
remove the queued pk actions for cascade and set null as well and at least
turn the queued pk action for set default into one that could be
consolidated.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Rod Taylor 2005-05-26 16:06:19 Re: Rod Taylor
Previous Message Tom Lane 2005-05-26 15:56:20 Re: foreign keys and RI triggers