reverse index

From: Vlad Zaitsev <vlz_at_sft.com.ua>
Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 09:48:22 +0300
Message-Id: <10494.105361@fatcity.com>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_00F2_01BFBB2E.0BB03410 Content-Type: text/plain;

charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hello all
Strange behavior of foreign key founded by Evgeny Faddenkov: table T has primary key PK, table t2 has foreign key FK referensing = T(PK) on delete cascade. If T2(FK) indexed normal "on delete " work = well, but if T2(FK) indexed with REVERSE option on delete not work.=20 Is it bug?=20

------=_NextPart_000_00F2_01BFBB2E.0BB03410 Content-Type: text/html;

charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2920.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Hello all</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Strange behavior of foreign key founded =
by Evgeny=20
Faddenkov:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>table T has primary key PK, table t2 =
has foreign=20
key FK referensing T(PK) on delete cascade. If T2(FK) indexed = normal "on=20
delete " work well, but if T2(FK) indexed with REVERSE option on = delete not=20
work. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> Is it bug? =
</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_00F2_01BFBB2E.0BB03410-- Received on Thu May 11 2000 - 01:48:22 CDT

reverse index - BUG?