Michael Glaesemann wrote: > > On Mar 5, 2004, at 1:49 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > Agreed. The current text is: > > > > NOTICE: costly cross-type foreign key because of component 1 > > > > Seems we should say something like: > > > > NOTICE: foreign key constraint 'constrname' must use a costly > > cross-type conversion > > It seems to me that in some ways this is similar to the situation where > indexes are created to enforce a UNIQUE constraint. Indexes also incur > additional overhead for inserts and updates, but make no mention of the > cost: the DBA is assumed to know that, or they can check the docs if > they're interested in why such a notice is being raised. I'd think > something as simple as > > NOTICE: foreign key constraint 'constrname' will require a cross-type > conversion > > similar to > NOTICE: CREATE TABLE / UNIQUE will create implicit index > "foox_interesting_key" for table "foox"
The issue is that an index always has a cost (pretty constant cost), which is known to the creator. The case he is warning about is when primary/foreign key types don't match, and a costly comparison will be required to do the referential integrity checking. Also, seems this should be a WARNING, rather than a notice. NOTICE, I think, is for normal behavior (creating a sequence for SERIAL), and warning is for unusual behavior, which this is. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
