Ah, OK, I've misread your mail, so you say ignoring on delete triggers
is normal for TRUNCATE. Then all is fine with this one. I still need to
find out what have eaten the memory on that particular delete operation.
Cheers,
Csaba.
On Wed, 2005-07-13 at 14:23, Oliver Jowett wrote:
> Csaba Nagy wrote:
> > Well, I'm still at a guess what could cause the problem on the kind of
> > query I was executing (a "delete"). Kris' explanation with the deferred
> > trigger was the closest till now, except the trigger was not deferred,
> > and truncate still succeded with the "ON DELETE" trigger in place...
>
> Doesn't TRUNCATE explicitly ignore ON DELETE triggers?
>
> -O
