Re: Proposal: TRUNCATE TABLE table RESTRICT

From: Mike Mascari <mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com>
To: Don Baccus <dhogaza(at)pacifier(dot)com>
Cc: Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Proposal: TRUNCATE TABLE table RESTRICT
Date: 2000-06-08 15:53:22
Message-ID: 393FC172.C7959F8D@mascari.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Don Baccus wrote:
>
> At 10:43 AM 6/8/00 -0400, Mike Mascari wrote:
...
> > And the Oracle docs state that DML triggers aren't fired
> >when a TRUNCATE is issued, so I didn't think there would be
> >issues there. Could you check?
>
> It refuses to do the TRUNCATE, whether or not there's a
> "ON DELETE CASCADE" modifier to the references.
>
> That seems reasonable - it allows one to still say "truncate's
> really fast because it doesn't scan the rows in the table",
> and refuses to break RI constraints.
>
> All that needs doing is to check for the existence of
> at least one RI trigger on the table that's being truncated,
> and saying "no way, jose" if we want to mimic Oracle in
> this regard.
>
> TODO item?

Sounds like it to me. Rats...

Mike Mascari

>
> - Don Baccus, Portland OR <dhogaza(at)pacifier(dot)com>
> Nature photos, on-line guides, Pacific Northwest
> Rare Bird Alert Service and other goodies at
> http://donb.photo.net.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2000-06-08 16:18:26 Re: Bit strings
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2000-06-08 15:47:23 Re: Proposal: TRUNCATE TABLE table RESTRICT