Re: CHECK vs REFERENCES

From: Michael Fuhr <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org>
To: "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: CHECK vs REFERENCES
Date: 2005-09-10 13:06:27
Message-ID: 20050910130627.GA45586@winnie.fuhr.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Sat, Sep 10, 2005 at 01:03:03AM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Sep 2005, Michael Fuhr wrote:
> >INSERT INTO test_check SELECT 1 FROM generate_series(1, 100000);
> >INSERT 0 100000
> >Time: 3492.344 ms
> >
> >INSERT INTO test_fk SELECT 1 FROM generate_series(1, 100000);
> >INSERT 0 100000
> >Time: 23578.853 ms
>
> Yowch, I expected CHECK to be better ... but not so significantly ... I
> figured I'd be saving milliseconds, which, on a busy server, would add up
> fast ... but not 10k' of milliseconds ...

Results will differ depending on the table structure: if you're
indexing ten columns and have five triggers then the foreign key
check will have less of an overall impact.

--
Michael Fuhr

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mark Dilger 2005-09-11 07:43:18 performance discrepancy indexing one column versus two columns
Previous Message Chris Browne 2005-09-10 05:21:09 Re: please comment on cpu 32 bit or 64 bit