Re: delete cascade

Could you please point me to any information about deadlock caused by cascade delete.

I have never heard of this and I am more than a little bit paranoid.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Jon Savell

On Apr 15, 4:41 am, "Brian Selzer" <b..._at_selzer-software.com> wrote:

> Personally, I avoid using referential actions whenever possible--mainly
> because they increase the probability that a deadlock will occur, unless of
> course you add code to obtain locks beforehand in the correct order. It's
> very easy to forget to add that code since deadlocks are usually rare. Out
> of sight, out of mind: greater potential for bugs. It's also easier to come
> back to a procedure and figure out what it does if everything in the
> database that may be touched by that procedure is accessed directly within
> it. Again, out of sight, out of mind: greater potential for bugs. Another
> issue is that in some systems there can only be one cascade path between
> tables in a database. This leads to inconsistent code: along one path you
> allow the system to handle it; along another the application must. It
> should be apparent that inconsistent code can also increase the risk for
> bugs.
>
> > (just trying to keep Marshall interested.)
>
> > p
Received on Wed Apr 18 2007 - 18:47:41 CEST