Re: autocommit vs TRUNCATE et al

Mike Mascari wrote:
> Gavin Sherry wrote:
> > On Fri, 18 Oct 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Anyone see a way out of this catch-22? If not, which is the least
> >>bad alternative?
> >
> >
> > Ultimately, fix TRUNCATE to be transaction safe. This is non-trivial,
> > I know :-).
> >
> > Regardless, the first option seems the less of the two evils.
>
> Even though TRUNCATE was modeled after Oracle's TRUNCATE and
> Oracle's TRUNCATE commits the running tx, truncates the
> relation, and starts a new tx, regardless of whether or not
> TRUNCATE is the first statement of the tx?

That seems just too harsh to me. I think we should impose some
structure to it, though we will have compatibility issues.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073