List:General Discussion« Previous MessageNext Message »
From:Vivek Khera Date:July 23 1999 2:17pm
Subject:Re: Referential Integrity Question
View as plain text  
>>>>> "s" == sinisa  <sinisa@stripped> writes:

>> I've seen this echoed on this list many times.  Exactly what
>> performance penalty would there be if you did *not* have any FOREIGN
>> KEYS on a given set of tables?  Why is there a penalty in this
>> situation?  I can't imagine why this would be.
>> 

s> Exactly the same thing that would make triggers slow down RDBMS.On any 
s> possible update and delete and replace, a code should have to go
s> through, possibly very lengthy linked list of conditions, bans
s> etc. After that code would have to check for a specific datum,
s> whether it is OK or not, etc, etc ..

I still don't see why there is a penalty to have FOREIGN KEYS in the
DBMS when you don't use them.  If the tables have no FORIEGN KEYS then 
why is there a speed penalty?  There are no conditions to check.  I
agree that if you use the FOREIGN KEYS there will be a penalty, but
that's ok if I need them.

Thread
Referential Integrity QuestionPing Lau23 Jul
  • Re: Referential Integrity QuestionPatrick Greenwell23 Jul
  • Referential Integrity Questionsinisa23 Jul
    • Re: Referential Integrity QuestionVivek Khera23 Jul
      • Re: Referential Integrity Questionsinisa23 Jul
        • Re: Referential Integrity QuestionVivek Khera23 Jul
          • Re: Referential Integrity Questionsinisa23 Jul
            • Re: Referential Integrity QuestionVivek Khera23 Jul
              • Re: Referential Integrity Questionsinisa23 Jul
                • Re: Referential Integrity QuestionMartin Ramsch23 Jul
                  • Re: Referential Integrity QuestionMichael Widenius2 Aug