Re: TRUNCATE question

From: "Rod Taylor" <rbt(at)barchord(dot)com>
To: "Mike Mascari" <mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com>, "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>
Cc: "Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: TRUNCATE question
Date: 2001-08-03 02:11:20
Message-ID: 03f001c11bc1$962dda30$2205010a@jester
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Makes for a real pain when the nice and safe foreign keys aren't
really nice and safe anymore.
--
Rod Taylor

Your eyes are weary from staring at the CRT. You feel sleepy. Notice
how restful it is to watch the cursor blink. Close your eyes. The
opinions stated above are yours. You cannot imagine why you ever felt
otherwise.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Mascari" <mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com>
To: "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>
Cc: "Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 9:56 PM
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] TRUNCATE question

> Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> >
> > Is TRUNCATE supposed to be equivalent to DELETE FROM blah?
> >
> > Because I notice that DELETE triggers are not called when you
truncate a
> > table... Isn't that a bad thing?
>
> It's supposed to work that way - same as Oracle.
>
> Mike Mascari
> mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com
>
> ---------------------------(end of
broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mike Mascari 2001-08-03 02:40:20 Re: TRUNCATE question
Previous Message Tom Lane 2001-08-03 01:57:31 Re: AW: OID wraparound: summary and proposal