Re: "truncate all"?

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, shridhar_daithankar(at)persistent(dot)co(dot)in, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: "truncate all"?
Date: 2003-08-04 16:42:03
Message-ID: 200308040942.03024.josh@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Guys,

> I wouldn't care for that either. The prior suggestion of "TRUNCATE tab
> CASCADE" (to truncate any tables with FK dependencies on the original
> target, instead of failing) seems more reasonable.

I agree with Tom ... even the idea of a "TRUNCATE ALL" makes me nervous. If
we had such a feature, I'd advocate that it be superuser only.

As for "TRUNCATE CASCADE" or similar improvements, I agree that they could be
convenient ... but are easily worked around currently. So I wouldn't object
to putting TRUNCATE CASCADE on the todo list, but would argue that it be left
to the people who asked for it to implement it.

As far as

--
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Lee Kindness 2003-08-04 16:44:27 Re: 7.4 COPY BINARY Format Change
Previous Message Larry Rosenman 2003-08-04 16:40:17 Re: Thread-safe configuration option appears to