Re: ALTER TABLE ... ADD FOREIGN KEY ... NOT ENFORCED

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: ALTER TABLE ... ADD FOREIGN KEY ... NOT ENFORCED
Дата
Msg-id 12694.1292198834@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: ALTER TABLE ... ADD FOREIGN KEY ... NOT ENFORCED  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: ALTER TABLE ... ADD FOREIGN KEY ... NOT ENFORCED  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Re: ALTER TABLE ... ADD FOREIGN KEY ... NOT ENFORCED  (Peter Geoghegan <peter.geoghegan86@gmail.com>)
Re: ALTER TABLE ... ADD FOREIGN KEY ... NOT ENFORCED  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> ...  On the
> other hand, there's clearly also a use case for this behavior.  If a
> bulk load of prevalidated data forces an expensive revalidation of
> constraints that are already known to hold, there's a real chance the
> DBA will be backed into a corner where he simply has no choice but to
> not use foreign keys, even though he might really want to validate the
> foreign-key relationships on a going-forward basis.

There may well be a case to be made for doing this on grounds of
practical usefulness.  I'm just voicing extreme skepticism that it can
be supported by reference to the standard.

Personally I'd prefer to see us look into whether we couldn't arrange
for low-impact establishment of a verified FK relationship, analogous to
CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY.  We don't let people just arbitrarily claim
that a uniqueness condition exists, and ISTM that if we can handle that
case we probably ought to be able to handle FK checking similarly.
        regards, tom lane


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: proposal : cross-column stats
Следующее
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: ALTER TABLE ... ADD FOREIGN KEY ... NOT ENFORCED