Re: truncate in combination with deferred triggers

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone(dot)bigpanda(dot)com>
Cc: Markus Schiltknecht <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: truncate in combination with deferred triggers
Date: 2006-08-21 21:12:18
Message-ID: 19994.1156194738@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> writes:
> Yeah, I think there are a few possibilities around truncate inside a
> savepoint that's rolledback that we have to be careful of.

Yuck :-(

> If we could mark the entries in some way so we knew whether or not they
> were made obsolete by a truncate of our own tranasaction or a committed or
> rolled back past subtransaction of ours, we could probably make both of
> these work nicely.

That seems much more trouble than it's worth, unless someone can
convince me that this isn't a corner case with little real-world value.

Furthermore, this still doesn't address the worry about whether there
are cases where dropping the trigger calls would be inappropriate.

I propose just having TRUNCATE check for pending triggers on the
target tables, and throw an error if there are any.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stephan Szabo 2006-08-21 21:44:03 Re: truncate in combination with deferred triggers
Previous Message Stephan Szabo 2006-08-21 20:43:58 Re: truncate in combination with deferred triggers