From: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Glaesemann <grzm(at)myrealbox(dot)com> |
Cc: | Rodrigo Sakai <rodrigo(dot)sakai(at)zanthus(dot)com(dot)br>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: FOREIGN KEYS vs PERFORMANCE |
Date: | 2006-04-11 23:38:20 |
Message-ID: | 20060411233820.GB49405@pervasive.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Wed, Apr 12, 2006 at 08:06:17AM +0900, Michael Glaesemann wrote:
>
> On Apr 12, 2006, at 4:13 , Rodrigo Sakai wrote:
>
> > I think this is an old question, but I want to know if it really
> >is well worth to not create some foreign keys an deal with the
> >referential integrity at application-level?????
>
> If I had to choose between one or the other, I'd leave all
> referential integrity in the database and deal with the errors thrown
> when referential integrity is violated in the application. PostgreSQL
> is designed to handle these kinds of issues. Anything you code in
> your application is more likely to contain bugs or miss corner cases
> that would allow referential integrity to be violated. PostgreSQL has
> been pounded on for years by a great many users and developers,
> making the likelihood of bugs still remaining much smaller.
It's also pretty unlikely that you can make RI in the application
perform better than in the database.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2006-04-12 02:06:49 | Re: Restore performance? |
Previous Message | Michael Glaesemann | 2006-04-11 23:06:17 | Re: FOREIGN KEYS vs PERFORMANCE |