On 4/14/07, Bill Moran [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In response to Kynn Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
The two situations are semantically identical: each record in table bar
refers to a record in table foo. The difference is that in the first
schema, this referencing is done through an artificial
Merlin Moncure wrote:
Using surrogate keys is dangerous and can lead to very bad design
habits that are unfortunately so prevalent in the software industry
they are virtually taught in schools. ... While there is
nothing wrong with them in principle (you are exchanging one key for
another as a
On 4/16/07, Craig A. James [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Merlin Moncure wrote:
Using surrogate keys is dangerous and can lead to very bad design
habits that are unfortunately so prevalent in the software industry
they are virtually taught in schools. ... While there is
nothing wrong with them
Craig A. James wrote:
Merlin Moncure wrote:
Using surrogate keys is dangerous and can lead to very bad design
habits that are unfortunately so prevalent in the software industry
they are virtually taught in schools. ... While there is
nothing wrong with them in principle (you are exchanging
So the next question is, what pg version is the original poster using?
because 8.1.x doesn't report trigger execution times, and 8.2.x would use
a single bitmap index scan with an = ANY condition, not a BitmapOr.
I have tried 8.1.0 and 8.1.3 for this query.
---(end of
cluster [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So the next question is, what pg version is the original poster using?
because 8.1.x doesn't report trigger execution times, and 8.2.x would use
a single bitmap index scan with an = ANY condition, not a BitmapOr.
I have tried 8.1.0 and 8.1.3 for this query.
Idly thumbing through the code, I came across something that might
possibly explain your results. Do the rows being updated contain
NULLs in the foreign-key columns? I see that ri_KeysEqual() treats
two null values as not equal, which might be overzealous respect for
SQL null semantics in this
On Mon, 16 Apr 2007, Merlin Moncure wrote:
extraordinary cases do happen, like a company overhauling its numbering
systems, but such cases can be dealt with by a number of methods
including letting RI do its thing.
I think the point Craig was trying to make is that what you refer to here
as
Hi Tom / Steve,
Am one of the silent readers of performance issues that come up on this list
(and are discussed in detail) ... just like this one.
If and when you do come up with a solution, please do post some details
about them here... (i say that coz it seems that for obvious reasons, things
Robins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If and when you do come up with a solution, please do post some details
about them here... (i say that coz it seems that for obvious reasons, things
must have gone off air after tom's last email, and one can understand that).
But an analysis, or atleast a
10 matches
Mail list logo
