Re: ADD FOREIGN KEY (was Re: [GENERAL] 7.4Beta) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: ADD FOREIGN KEY (was Re: [GENERAL] 7.4Beta)
Date
Msg-id 16699.1064809727@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: ADD FOREIGN KEY (was Re: [GENERAL] 7.4Beta)  (Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>)
Responses Re: ADD FOREIGN KEY (was Re: [GENERAL] 7.4Beta)  (Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>)
Re: ADD FOREIGN KEY (was Re: [GENERAL] 7.4Beta)  (Jan Wieck <JanWieck@Yahoo.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au> writes:
> I think we need someway of telling postgres to suppress a foreign key check.

Well, the subtext argument here is "do we fix it by providing a way to
suppress the check, or do we fix it by making the check fast enough to
be tolerable?"

I think the advantages of choice (b) are obvious --- it doesn't allow
bogus data to be loaded accidentally, and it doesn't create a problem
with loading existing 7.3 dump files that don't know how to suppress the
check.

If we find there is no way to do (b) acceptably well, then and only then
would I want to consider (a).
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: 2-phase commit
Next
From: Christopher Kings-Lynne
Date:
Subject: pg_get_ruledef and extra line breaks