Re: are foreign keys realized as indexes? - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Martijn van Oosterhout
Subject Re: are foreign keys realized as indexes?
Date
Msg-id 20070508135408.GB17033@svana.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: are foreign keys realized as indexes?  (Felix Kater <fkater@googlemail.com>)
Responses Re: are foreign keys realized as indexes?
Re: are foreign keys realized as indexes?
List pgsql-general
On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 02:14:54PM +0200, Felix Kater wrote:
> If I get you right:
>
> There is *no complete* substitute for foreign keys by using *indexes*
> since I'd loose the referencial integrity (whereas for unique contraints
> there *is* a full replacement using indexes)?

A unique index is not a "substitute" for a unique constraint, they're
exactly the same thing. If you drop your constraint and create a unique
index, you're back where you started. You neither added nor removed
anything.

On a certain level foreign keys are just triggers, specially coded to
do the work. Yes, you could write your own triggers to do exactly the
same thing, but why bother, when someone has written them for you and
made nice syntax to use them?

Have a nice day,
--
Martijn van Oosterhout   <kleptog@svana.org>   http://svana.org/kleptog/
> From each according to his ability. To each according to his ability to litigate.

Attachment

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Felix Kater
Date:
Subject: pg_contraint: 'action code' ?
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_contraint: 'action code' ?