On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 07:57 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> Simon Riggs wrote:
> > pg_dump restore times can be high when they include many ALTER TABLE ADD
> > FORIEGN KEY statements, since each statement checks the data to see if
> > it is fully valid in all cases.
> >
> > I've been asked "why we run that at all?", since if we dumped the tables
> > together, we already know they match.
> >
> > If we had a way of pg_dump passing on the information that the test
> > already passes, we would be able to skip the checks.
> >
> > Proposal:
> >
> > * Introduce a new mode for ALTER TABLE ADD FOREIGN KEY [WITHOUT CHECK];
> > When we run WITHOUT CHECK, iff both the source and target table are
> > newly created in this transaction, then we skip the check. If the check
> > is skipped we mark the constraint as being unchecked, so we can tell
> > later if this has been used.
> >
> > * Have pg_dump write the new syntax into its dumps, when both the source
> > and target table are dumped in same run
> >
> > I'm guessing that the WITHOUT CHECK option would not be acceptable as an
> > unprotected trap for our lazy and wicked users. :-)
> >
>
> This whole proposal would be a major footgun which would definitely be
> abused, IMNSHO.
OK, understood. Two negatives is enough to sink it.
> I think Heikki's idea of speeding up the check using a hash table of the
> foreign keys possibly has merit.
The query is sent through SPI, so if there was a way to speed this up,
we would already be using it implicitly. If we find a way to speed up
joins it will improve the FK check also.
The typical join plan for the check query is already a hash join,
assuming the target table is small enough. If not, its a huge sort/merge
join. So in a way, we already follow the suggestion.
-- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.comPostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
