Adrian Klaver <[email protected]> writes:
> On 07/05/2016 06:30 AM, Christian Castelli wrote:
>> ALTER TABLE smartphone
>> ADD CONSTRAINT pk_smartphone PRIMARY KEY (id),
>> ADD CONSTRAINT fk1 FOREIGN KEY (id_contact)
>> REFERENCES contact (id) MATCH SIMPLE
>> ON UPDATE RESTRICT ON DELETE RESTRICT,
>> ADD CONSTRAINT fk_plan FOREIGN KEY (id_tf)
>> REFERENCES public.tariff_plan(id) MATCH SIMPLE
>> ON UPDATE RESTRICT ON DELETE RESTRICT,
>> ADD CONSTRAINT fk_ram FOREIGN KEY (ret_id)
>> REFERENCES ram (id) MATCH SIMPLE
>> ON UPDATE RESTRICT ON DELETE RESTRICT,
>> ADD CONSTRAINT u_imei UNIQUE (imei_code);
> Does the table smartphone have data in it when you do the above ALTER?
I doubt it would matter. The problem with this is that it needs to take
exclusive lock on each one of the referenced tables (so as to add a new
foreign-key enforcement trigger). So any other transaction that is
accessing any two of those tables in a different order than this does
creates a deadlock hazard.
> Have you looked at separating the FK creation and validation?:
I think it'd likely be enough to add the FKs one at a time, rather
than all in one transaction.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
