Re: unreferenced primary keys: garbage collection
От | Albert REINER |
---|---|
Тема | Re: unreferenced primary keys: garbage collection |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20010124203639.A203@frithjof обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: unreferenced primary keys: garbage collection (Michael Fork <mfork@toledolink.com>) |
Список | pgsql-sql |
> On Tue, 23 Jan 2001, Forest Wilkinson wrote: > > > Jan, > > > > Thanks for the reply, but your solution is rather unattractive to me. It > > requires that, any time a reference to an address id is changed, five > > tables be searched for the address id. This will create unwanted overhead If - and I think this is the case for you - it is no problem for you to have some superfluous adresses in your tables, but you only want to avoid that those adresses remain there for a long time, you could simply run the function Jan sent from a cron job. That seems to be likely to be more efficient not only than the triggers but also to the ON DELETE RESTRICT solution, I guess. Trivial, but I HTH - Albert. > > Forest Wilkinson wrote: > > >> > I have a database in which five separate tables may (or may not) reference > > >> > any given row in a table of postal addresses. I am using the primary / > > >> > foreign key support in postgres 7 to represent these references. > > >> > > > >> > My problem is that, any time a reference is removed (either by deleting or > > >> > updating a row in one of the five referencing tables), no garbage > > >> > collection is being performed on the address table. That is, when the > > >> > last reference to an address record goes away, the record is not removed > > >> > from the address table. Over time, my database will fill up with > > >> > abandoned address records. -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Albert Reiner <areiner@tph.tuwien.ac.at> Deutsch * English * Esperanto * Latine --------------------------------------------------------------------------
В списке pgsql-sql по дате отправления: