Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.182])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C9799F9A60
	for <pgsql-sql-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
	Sun,  2 Sep 2007 18:12:13 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.182]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 03811-07 for <pgsql-sql-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
	Sun,  2 Sep 2007 18:12:04 -0300 (ADT)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.5
Received: from bay0-omc2-s28.bay0.hotmail.com (bay0-omc2-s28.bay0.hotmail.com
	[65.54.246.164])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E6729F95DB
	for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Sun,  2 Sep 2007 18:12:07 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from BAY120-W14 ([207.46.9.177]) by bay0-omc2-s28.bay0.hotmail.com
	with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2668);
	Sun, 2 Sep 2007 14:12:05 -0700
Message-ID: <BAY120-W14B9D62D95DF7DDBF8794BBBC80@phx.gbl>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="_d53c4689-0030-4549-92ee-ee11cc55ee86_"
X-Originating-IP: [24.71.223.153]
From: L D <lenardd@hotmail.com>
To: <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>
Subject: PK & FK & Index Question
Date: Sun, 2 Sep 2007 19:12:06 -0200
Importance: Normal
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Sep 2007 21:12:05.0943 (UTC)
	FILETIME=[EA49A470:01C7EDA5]
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.221 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=BAYES_20=-0.74,
	HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Archive-Number: 200709/5
X-Sequence-Number: 29218

--_d53c4689-0030-4549-92ee-ee11cc55ee86_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


Hi All,
=20
Assume the following have a one-to-one relationship:
=20
team_contact
     team_contact_id  (PK)
     first_name     last_name
     ...
=20
team_contact_contacts
     team_contact_id  (FK)
     home_phone     work_phone
     ...
=20
=20
Should I set the latter table's FK also to PK?  If so, do I need to set an =
index on the FK even though it's also the primary key?
=20
Alternatively, I could just add a UK contraint to FK and do away with PK, r=
ight?
=20
Thanks.
=20
--Lenard   =20
=20
=20
=20
_________________________________________________________________
Connect to the next generation of MSN Messenger=A0
http://imagine-msn.com/messenger/launch80/default.aspx?locale=3Den-us&sourc=
e=3Dwlmailtagline=

--_d53c4689-0030-4549-92ee-ee11cc55ee86_
Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html>
<head>
<style>
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
FONT-SIZE: 10pt;
FONT-FAMILY:Tahoma
}
</style>
</head>
<body class=3D'hmmessage'>
Hi All,<BR>
&nbsp;<BR>
Assume the following&nbsp;have a one-to-one relationship:<BR>
&nbsp;<BR>
team_contact<BR>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; team_contact_id&nbsp; (PK)<BR>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; first_name<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; last_name<B=
R>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; ...<BR>
&nbsp;<BR>
team_contact_contacts<BR>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; team_contact_id&nbsp; (FK)<BR>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; home_phone<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; work_phone<=
BR>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; ...<BR>
&nbsp;<BR>
&nbsp;<BR>
Should I set the latter table's FK also to PK?&nbsp; If so,&nbsp;do I need =
to set an index on the FK even though it's also the primary key?<BR>
&nbsp;<BR>
Alternatively, I could just&nbsp;add a UK contraint to FK and do away with =
PK, right?<BR>
&nbsp;<BR>
Thanks.<BR>
&nbsp;<BR>
--Lenard&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <BR>
&nbsp;<BR>
&nbsp;<BR>
&nbsp;<BR><br /><hr />Connect to the next generation of MSN Messenger=A0  <=
a href=3D'http://imagine-msn.com/messenger/launch80/default.aspx?locale=3De=
n-us&source=3Dwlmailtagline' target=3D'_new'>Get it now! </a></body>
</html>=

--_d53c4689-0030-4549-92ee-ee11cc55ee86_--