Timeline for How do I prove that the act of removing foreign keys doesn't corrupt existing data?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 3, 2017 at 16:48 | history | edited | Vérace | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited body
|
| May 23, 2017 at 12:40 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://stackoverflow.com/ with https://stackoverflow.com/
|
|
| Aug 21, 2014 at 11:21 | comment | added | Agi Hammerthief | Thanks again. That's what I was thinking as well. I'd like to mark both this and David Spillett's answer as accepted, but unfortunately only one can be chosen. | |
| Aug 21, 2014 at 10:49 | comment | added | Vérace | Stop app (or suitable test copy). Dump database. Drop FOREIGN KEYs. Dump database again. Diff the files. There will be NO difference (in the INSERT INTO TABLE blah VALUES(...) sections of those files). | |
| Aug 21, 2014 at 10:35 | comment | added | Agi Hammerthief | Thank you for your contribution. While there is truth in this answer and it supports the argument for using foreign keys, it doesn't conclusively answer the question. | |
| Aug 20, 2014 at 16:39 | comment | added | Vérace | And any RI will have to reimplemented again and again - hello Groundhog Day! | |
| Aug 20, 2014 at 16:17 | comment | added | user1822 | I totally agree. Even if you could get RI right in your application, in my experience any database that contains valuable information will be used by more than just one application. | |
| Aug 20, 2014 at 16:11 | history | answered | Vérace | CC BY-SA 3.0 |