I understand now about index names, thanks.
I just found out that my host doesn't support InnoDB tables, so it's a
non-issue. I can't use them. I'll have to implement all the rules and checks
manually.
Thanks much for your help.
- Sheryl
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tore Bostrup" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2003 11:39 AM
Subject: Re: index questions
4: The index name allows you to for instance delete an index, specify it in
a hint, etc. But for the most part, a developer won't care what the name of
an index is.
5: AFAIK, the InnoDB tables support some of the more "professional" RDBMS
features, such as Transactions and Foreign Keys. I do not know what the
impact of moving to InnoDB tables would be. There may be some syntax
differences(?), performance, and size impacts. And a different set of bugs,
etc.
Declaring the FOREIGN KEY constraint in a database/on tables that do not
actually implement them can be a two-edged sword: You at least *document*
the *intent* that way, but if anyone sees the declaration and expects it to
do something, they could be in for a surprise.
Regards,
Tore.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sheryl Canter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Tore Bostrup" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:29 AM
Subject: Re: index questions
<snip>
> > 4: The name of an index does not determine whether it gets used or not.
>
> So if I have a primary index on CustID, it will be used if I reference
> "CustID" rather than PRIMARY? Why does the index have a name if it's never
> used? Are there situations where you should use the index name rather than
> the name of the column that is indexed?
>
> > 5: <snip> The FORIGN KEY statement is there to implement referential
> integrity
> in the database through declarative rules. Of course, you can be sloppy
and
> just
> not declare the relationships, just construct your queries as if the data
is
> OK... But I won't recommend it.
>
> I checked the manual and only InnoDB tables support these rules. I've been
> using MyISAM. Do you think I should change to InnoDB?
>
> > <snip> I have been unable to verify whether the CHECK constraint is
> actually
> implemented with any table types or in any versions of MySQL.
>
> I rechecked the manual (now that I can read it more easily). This is only
> available on InnoDB tables on MySQL 3.23.44 or later (like the FOREIGN KEY
> and REFERENCES syntax).
>
> Thanks again for your help.
>
> - Sheryl
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Before posting, please check:
> http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual)
> http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive)
>
> To request this thread, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To unsubscribe, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Before posting, please check:
http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual)
http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive)
To request this thread, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To unsubscribe, e-mail
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Before posting, please check:
http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual)
http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive)
To request this thread, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To unsubscribe, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
