X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org
Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E265053490
	for <pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Fri, 25 Mar 2005 18:47:53 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 54975-02
	for <pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Fri, 25 Mar 2005 18:47:35 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A74AC52A48
	for <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>;
	Fri, 25 Mar 2005 18:47:35 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j2PIlMLs028058;
	Fri, 25 Mar 2005 13:47:22 -0500 (EST)
To: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone.bigpanda.com>,
	Karim Nassar <karim.nassar@NAU.EDU>,
	Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>,
	pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Delete query takes exorbitant amount of time 
In-reply-to: <1111775050.11750.790.camel@localhost.localdomain> 
References: <1111709457.9085.127.camel@k2.cet.nau.edu>
	<2630.1111711927@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<1111715131.9085.174.camel@k2.cet.nau.edu>
	<3750.1111715318@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<4243879B.10200@familyhealth.com.au>
	<20845.1111733900@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<1111763448.11750.730.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<23515.1111763837@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<1111766478.11750.762.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<20050325082101.G4358@megazone.bigpanda.com>
	<1111775050.11750.790.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Comments: In-reply-to Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>
	message dated "Fri, 25 Mar 2005 18:24:10 +0000"
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 13:47:22 -0500
Message-ID: <28057.1111776442@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.007 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 200503/554
X-Sequence-Number: 11259

Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On Fri, 2005-03-25 at 10:17 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Other than spec compliance, you mean?  SQL99 says
>>> 
>>> ... The declared type of each referencing column shall be
>>> comparable to the declared type of the corresponding referenced
>>> column.

> Tom had said SQL99 required this; I have pointed out SQL:2003, which
> supercedes the SQL99 standard, does not require this.

You're reading the wrong part of SQL:2003.  11.8 <referential constraint
definition> syntax rule 9 still has the text I quoted.

> Leading us back to my original point - what is the benefit of continuing
> with having a WARNING when that leads people into trouble later?

Accepting spec-compliant schemas.

			regards, tom lane