In article <3f5315cd$0$10359$afc38c87_at_news.optusnet.com.au>,
howardjr2000_at_yahoo.com.au says...
>
> Quite the opposite. Foreign keys nearly always *ought* to have indexes, but
> never do unless one makes it so. Terrible locking issues arise when
> non-indexed foreign keys are in place, and someone decides to update the
> parent table... Ugh!
>
Howard,
isn't there only a locking issue if you update the primary key of the
parent table? Updating other fields should be OK. Please correct me if
I'm wrong.
Received on Mon Sep 01 2003 - 05:18:13 CDT
