Search Postgresql Archives

Re: Foreign Key 'walker'?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Erwin Moller wrote:

No, that is not the kind of chicken I was talking about. ;-)
My chicken is more along these lines:
I often have some tables to which everything is related (eg tblcourse that contains everything belonging to a certain course). I don't want to make a single simple mistake that if I accidentally delete an entry there, I lose all underlying data via the CASCADE.

OK, so the idea is to prevent DELETEs of records with existing relationships, except when invoked via some sort of script or wrapper that says, essentially, "Yes, I really do mean delete this record and all its related records, I'm not just accidentally issuing a DELETE".

Personally, if I had to do this I'd do this with a PL/PgSQL function that dug through pg_catalog or INFORMATION_SCHEMA to do a depth-first search and delete of the related records. Frankly, though, it sounds horrible, and if you run into a relationship loop you're in a real mess. At least the latter problem can't bite you unless you use DEFERRED constraints.

No problem at all.
I totally agree with you.
I only have this fear I screw up (not Postgresql) if I use CASCADE and accidentally delete a 'high' record in the chain.

To me, that sounds like you might have some of your relationships backwards. Generally I wouldn't want to set an ON DELETE CASCADE relationship on a parent record (not does it usually make any sense) ; rather, the relationship on the child record will have ON DELETE CASCADE set so the child will be deleted if the parent is. Deleting a child record should only delete the child record, never cascade up to a parent.

The child record is useless and meaningless without the parent, so this is appropriate.

For a practical example in a course/student management tool: If you delete a `student', and the student has `student_course' (an m:n mapping table) entries referencing `course', you would not expect the course to be deleted, only the student<->course relationship and the student. If the course was deleted explicitly by the user, you'd expect the student_course relationship to restrict the deletion if students were still listed as taking the course. So, the natural definition would be:

CREATE TABLE student_course (
   student_id INTEGER REFERENCES student(student_id) ON DELETE CASCADE,
   course_id INTEGER REFERENCES course(course_id) ON DELETE NO ACTION,
   PRIMARY KEY(student_id, course_id)
);

... which is pretty close to what you end up with if you just bang out the obvious structure for the relationship.

There are odd cases where those relationships end up being reversed (or at least bidirectional), and in those cases I do tend to avoid ON DELETE CASCADE, instead providing functions, triggers or rules to clean up appropriately.

--
Craig Ringer



--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Postgresql Jobs]     [Postgresql Admin]     [Postgresql Performance]     [Linux Clusters]     [PHP Home]     [PHP on Windows]     [Kernel Newbies]     [PHP Classes]     [PHP Books]     [PHP Databases]     [Postgresql & PHP]     [Yosemite]
  Powered by Linux