Re: Trigger Performance

From: Alban Hertroys <dalroi(at)solfertje(dot)student(dot)utwente(dot)nl>
To: Randall Smith <randall(at)tnr(dot)cc>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Trigger Performance
Date: 2011-01-16 00:26:03
Message-ID: 83164096-C772-45FA-822E-C4D29ADD47C4@solfertje.student.utwente.nl
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On 15 Jan 2011, at 23:52, Randall Smith wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I've created a trigger that checks the uniqueness of two columns in a
> table. Traditionally, one would use a unique constraint, but in my
> case, the size of the unique index would be too large and some
> performance loss is acceptable.

But you already do have an index on that id-field, so what's the problem with using a unique constraint? Its unique index could just replace the existing one.

Alban Hertroys

--
Screwing up is an excellent way to attach something to the ceiling.

!DSPAM:737,4d323b1e11871071717716!

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jasen Betts 2011-01-16 02:29:35 Re: How to generate unique invoice numbers for each day
Previous Message Alban Hertroys 2011-01-16 00:19:16 Re: Record with a field consisting of table rows