David Fetter wrote: > > My vote is to just go ahead and change it. I don't really see much > > of a use-case for truncating only the parent of an inheritance > > hierarchy anyway, so I doubt that many people would be affected. > > Here's one such use-case. Let's say a table has gotten large and > you've decided to partition it. You add child tables, add one or more > triggers to the parent table to make sure it never gets a row, > populate the child tables from the parent table, then you want to > remove all the rows from the parent table. > > TRUNCATE ONLY handles this case just fine, so long as there's a clear > message in the release notes. :)
Agreed. The good thing is that I don't imagine what you have described above would be scripted so someone would be typing that and hopefully know the current behavior. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
