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

Re: insert

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to>
Cc: Rod Taylor <pg(at)rbt(dot)ca>,Ulrich Wisser <ulrich(dot)wisser(at)relevanttraffic(dot)se>,gnari <gnari(at)simnet(dot)is>,Postgresql Performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: insert
Date: 2004-08-13 18:01:59
Message-ID: 25254.1092420119@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to> writes:
>   Rod Taylor <pg(at)rbt(dot)ca> wrote:
>> It is likely that you are missing an index on one of those foreign key'd
>> items.

> I don't think that is too likely as a foreign key reference must be a
> unique key which would have an index. I think the type mismatch
> suggestion is probably what the problem is.

I agree.  It is possible to have a lack-of-index problem on the
referencing column (as opposed to the referenced column), but that
normally only hurts you for deletes from the referenced table.

> The current solution is to make the types match. In 8.0.0 it would probably
> work efficiently as is, though it isn't normal for foreign keys to have a type
> mismatch and he may want to change that anyway.

8.0 will not fix this particular issue, as I did not add any numeric-vs-int
comparison operators.  If we see a lot of complaints we could think
about adding such, but for 8.0 only the more common cases such as
int-vs-bigint are covered.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

  • Re: insert at 2004-08-13 15:02:43 from Bruno Wolff III

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Richard HuxtonDate: 2004-08-13 19:23:52
Subject: Re: Weird Database Performance problem!
Previous:From: Josh BerkusDate: 2004-08-13 18:01:52
Subject: Re: Reiser4

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