|
|
Posted by Paul on 06/26/07 15:44
Tim <tim_rogers01@hotmail.com> wrote:
> In general terms it is quite acceptable to have a standalone table
> with no FK relationships instansiated.
> Indeed, in times gone by whole databases were created in this manner
> as the overhead for OLTP with all the index data manipulation behind
> the scences could bring a system to its knees. (PK & FK are backed by
> 'hidden' indexes).
The only thing that will bring a system to its knees faster than
having indexes and FKs is *_not_* having indexes and FKs.
They are purely and simply a nightmare.
<auditing>
> I would not recommend the above for busy tables.
And there's a point to auditing tables that are relatively static -
normally lookups?
Paul...
> Hope that helps, Tim
--
plinehan __at__ yahoo __dot__ __com__
XP Pro, SP 2,
Oracle, 10.2.0.1 (Express Edition)
Interbase 6.0.2.0;
When asking database related questions, please give other posters
some clues, like operating system, version of db being used and DDL.
The exact text and/or number of error messages is useful (!= "it didn't work!").
Thanks.
Furthermore, as a courtesy to those who spend
time analysing and attempting to help, please
do not top post.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|