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
我也听过这种说法——有些人忘记在外键上放索引,然后抱怨某些操作很慢(因为约束检查可以利用任何索引)。所以总结一下:没有好的理由不使用外键。所有现代数据库都支持级联删除,所以…
其他回答
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.
“在添加记录之前,检查对应的记录是否存在于另一个表中”是业务逻辑。
这里有一些你不希望在数据库中使用它的原因:
If the business rules change, you have to change the database. The database will need to recreate the index in a lot of cases and this is slow on large tables. (Changing rules include: allow guests to post messages or allow users to delete their account despite having posted comments, etc). Changing the database is not as easy as deploying a software fix by pushing the changes to the production repository. We want to avoid changing the database structure as much as possible. The more business logic there is in the database the more you increase the chances of needing to change the databae (and triggering re-indexing). TDD. In unit tests you can substitute the database for mocks and test the functionality. If you have any business logic in your database, you are not doing complete tests and would need to either test with the database or replicate the business logic in code for testing purposes, duplicating the logic and increasing the likelyhood of the logic not working in the same way. Reusing your logic with different data sources. If there is no logic in the database, my application can create objects from records from the database, create them from a web service, a json file or any other source. I just need to swap out the data mapper implementation and can use all my business logic with any source. If there is logic in the database, this isn't possible and you have to implement the logic at the data mapper layer or in the business logic. Either way, you need those checks in your code. If there's no logic in the database I can deploy the application in different locations using different database or flat-file implementations.
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。
有一个很好的理由不使用它们:如果你不了解它们的作用或如何使用它们。
在错误的情况下,外键约束可能导致事故的瀑布式复制。如果有人删除了错误的记录,恢复它可能会成为一项艰巨的任务。
同样,相反,当您需要删除某些内容时,如果设计不当,约束可能会导致各种锁阻止您的操作。
在我参与的一个项目中,经常存在隐式关系而不是显式关系,这样可以在同一列上连接多个表。
请看下面的表格
地址
AddressId (PK) EntityId EntityType 城市 状态 国家 等。
EntityType的值可能是Employee、Company、Customer, EntityId指的是您感兴趣的表的主键。
我真的不认为这是最好的方法,但它对这个项目有效。