我记得在播客014中听到Joel Spolsky提到他几乎从未使用过外键(如果我没记错的话)。然而,对我来说,它们对于避免数据库中的重复和后续数据完整性问题非常重要。
人们是否有一些可靠的理由(以避免与Stack Overflow原则一致的讨论)?
编辑:“我还没有创建外键的理由,所以这可能是我真正建立一个外键的第一个理由。”
我记得在播客014中听到Joel Spolsky提到他几乎从未使用过外键(如果我没记错的话)。然而,对我来说,它们对于避免数据库中的重复和后续数据完整性问题非常重要。
人们是否有一些可靠的理由(以避免与Stack Overflow原则一致的讨论)?
编辑:“我还没有创建外键的理由,所以这可能是我真正建立一个外键的第一个理由。”
当前回答
使用外键的其他原因: —可以更好地重用数据库
不使用外键的其他原因: —您试图通过减少重用来锁定客户。
其他回答
更新:我现在总是使用外键。对于反对意见“他们使测试变得复杂”,我的回答是“编写单元测试,这样他们就根本不需要数据库。任何使用该数据库的测试都应该正确地使用它,这包括外键。如果准备工作很痛苦,那就找一种不那么痛苦的方式来做。”
外键使自动化测试复杂化
假设您正在使用外键。您正在编写一个自动测试,该测试表示“当我更新财务帐户时,它应该保存交易记录。”在这个测试中,您只关心两个表:帐户和事务。
但是,accounts对契约有一个外键,契约对客户有一个fk,客户对城市有一个fk,城市对州有一个fk。
现在,数据库将不允许您运行测试,除非在四个与测试无关的表中设置数据。
至少有两种可能的观点:
“这是一件好事:你的测试应该是现实的,这些数据限制将存在于生产中。” “这是一件坏事:你应该能够在不涉及其他部分的情况下对系统的各个部分进行单元测试。您可以为整个系统添加集成测试。”
也可以在运行测试时暂时关闭外键检查。至少MySQL支持这一点。
我同意德米特里的回答,说得很好。
For those who are worried about the performance overhead FK's often bring, there's a way (in Oracle) you can get the query optimiser advantage of the FK constraint without the cost overhead of constraint validation during insert, delete or update. That is to create the FK constraint with the attributes RELY DISABLE NOVALIDATE. This means the query optimiser ASSUMES that the constraint has been enforced when building queries, without the database actually enforcing the constraint. You have to be very careful here to take the responsibility when you populate a table with an FK constraint like this to make absolutely sure you don't have data in your FK column(s) that violate the constraint, as if you do so you could get unreliable results from queries that involve the table this FK constraint is on.
我通常在数据集市模式中的某些表上使用这种策略,但在集成登台模式中不使用。我要确保复制数据的表已经强制执行了相同的约束,或者ETL例程强制执行了该约束。
Quite often we receive the errors with FK constraints Cannot add or update a child row: a foreign key constraint fails Suppose there are two tables inventory_source and contract_lines, and we are referring inventory_source_id in contract_lines from inventory_source and suppose we want to delete record from inventory_source and the record is already present in contract_lines or we want to delete the PK column from Base table, we get errors for FK constraints, we can avoid it using the steps jotted below.
CREATE TABLE inventory_source (
inventory_source_id int(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
display_name varchar(40) NOT NULL,
state_id int(11) NOT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY (inventory_source_id),
KEY state_id (state_id),
CONSTRAINT ba_inventory_source_state_fk FOREIGN KEY (state_id) REFERENCES ba_state (state_id)
) ENGINE=InnoDB AUTO_INCREMENT=3 DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8;
CREATE TABLE contract_lines(
contract_line_id int(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
inventory_source_id int(11) NULL ,
PRIMARY KEY (contract_line_id),
UNIQUE KEY contract_line_id (contract_line_id),
KEY AI_contract_line_id (contract_line_id),
KEY contract_lines_inventory_source_fk (inventory_source_id),
CONSTRAINT contract_lines_inventory_source_fk FOREIGN KEY (inventory_source_id) REFERENCES ba_inventory_source (inventory_source_id)
) ENGINE=InnoDB AUTO_INCREMENT=135 DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8 ;
我们可以采用以下步骤克服它:-
Delete or update the row from the inventory_source will automatically delete or update the matching rows in the contract_lines table and this is known as cascade delete or update. Another way of doing it is setting the column i.e inventory_source_id in the contract_lines table to NULL, when a record corresponding to it is deleted in the inventory_source table. We can restrict the parent table for delete or update in other words one can reject the delete or update operation for the inventory_source table. Attempt to delete or update a primary key value will not be permitted to proceed if there is a related foreign key value in the referenced table.
使用外键的原因:
you won't get Orphaned Rows you can get nice "on delete cascade" behavior, automatically cleaning up tables knowing about the relationships between tables in the database helps the Optimizer plan your queries for most efficient execution, since it is able to get better estimates on join cardinality. FKs give a pretty big hint on what statistics are most important to collect on the database, which in turn leads to better performance they enable all kinds of auto-generated support -- ORMs can generate themselves, visualization tools will be able to create nice schema layouts for you, etc. someone new to the project will get into the flow of things faster since otherwise implicit relationships are explicitly documented
不使用外键的原因:
you are making the DB work extra on every CRUD operation because it has to check FK consistency. This can be a big cost if you have a lot of churn by enforcing relationships, FKs specify an order in which you have to add/delete things, which can lead to refusal by the DB to do what you want. (Granted, in such cases, what you are trying to do is create an Orphaned Row, and that's not usually a good thing). This is especially painful when you are doing large batch updates, and you load up one table before another, with the second table creating consistent state (but should you be doing that sort of thing if there is a possibility that the second load fails and your database is now inconsistent?). sometimes you know beforehand your data is going to be dirty, you accept that, and you want the DB to accept it you are just being lazy :-)
我认为(我不确定!)大多数已建立的数据库都提供了一种指定外键的方法,这种方法不是强制的,只是一些元数据。由于不强制执行消除了不使用fk的所有理由,如果第二部分中的任何理由适用,您可能应该走那条路。
我只知道Oracle数据库,不知道其他数据库,而且我知道外键对于保持数据完整性是必不可少的。在插入数据之前,需要建立一个数据结构,并且建立正确的数据结构。当这一步完成时——所有的主键和外键都创建好了——工作就完成了!
意思是:孤立的行?不。这辈子都没见过。除非一个糟糕的程序员忘记了外键,或者他在另一个层次上实现了外键。在Oracle的环境中,这两者都是巨大的错误,会导致数据复制、孤儿数据,从而导致数据损坏。我无法想象一个没有强制FK的数据库。在我看来是一片混乱。这有点像Unix权限系统:假设每个人都是root用户。想想混乱吧。
外键是必不可少的,就像主键一样。这就像是说:如果我们移除主键会怎样?那么,整个混乱将会发生。这是什么。不能将主键或外键的职责移到编程级别,但必须移到数据级别。
缺点呢?是的,当然!因为在插入时,会有更多的检查。但是,如果数据完整性比性能更重要,那么这是显而易见的。Oracle上的性能问题更多地与索引有关,索引包含PK和FK。