Re: [HACKERS] GSoC 2017: Foreign Key Arrays - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Mark Rofail
Subject Re: [HACKERS] GSoC 2017: Foreign Key Arrays
Date
Msg-id CAJvoCuuzAv1Rrkhokqk2Tt-pFb3rOmuEs9eCXXQvUzNZwEFYrg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] GSoC 2017: Foreign Key Arrays  ("Joel Jacobson" <joel@compiler.org>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] GSoC 2017: Foreign Key Arrays
List pgsql-hackers
Hello Joel,

Thank you for your kind words and happy that you benefited from this patch.
We simply assert that the update/delete method used is supported currently only "NO ACTION" and "RESTRICT", this can be extended in future patches without rework, just extra logic.
Please don't hesitate to give your feedback.

I would love some help with some performance comparisons if you are up to it, between Many-to-Many, Foreign Key Arrays and Gin Indexed Foreign Key Arrays. 

/Mark

On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 1:51 PM Joel Jacobson <joel@compiler.org> wrote:
Hi Mark,

On Mon, Jan 25, 2021, at 09:14, Joel Jacobson wrote:
I'll continue testing over the next couple of days and report if I find any more oddities.

I've continued testing by trying to make full use of this feature in the catalog-diff-tool I'm working on.

Today I became aware of a SQL feature that I must confess I've never used before,
that turned out to be useful in my tool, as I then wouldn't need to follow FKs
to do updates manually, but let the database do them automatically.

I'm talking about "ON CASCADE UPDATE", which I see is not supported in the patch.

In my tool, I could simplify the code for normal FKs by using ON CASCADE UPDATE,
but will continue to need my hand-written traverse-FKs-recursively code for Foreign Key Arrays.

I lived a long SQL life without ever needing ON CASCADE UPDATE,
so I would definitively vote for Foreign Key Arrays to be added even without support for this.

Would you say the patch is written in a way which would allow adding support for ON CASCADE UPDATE
later on mostly by adding code, or would it require a major rewrite?

I hesitated if I should share this with you, since I'm really grateful for this feature even without ON CASCADE UPDATE,
but since this was discovered when testing real-life scenario and not some hypothetical example,
I felt it should be noted that I stumbled upon this during testing.

Again, thank you so much for working on this.

/Joel

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Masahiko Sawada
Date:
Subject: Re: Error on failed COMMIT
Next
From: Simon Riggs
Date:
Subject: Re: WIP: System Versioned Temporal Table