Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On Wed, 2008-07-16 at 17:59 -0400, Neil Conway wrote:
>> On Wed, 2008-07-16 at 21:39 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
>>> So why do we need
>>> TRUNCATE foo, foo;
>>
>> For the sake of completeness? Having "TRUNCATE foo, foo" fail would be
>> rather inconsistent.
> Inconsistent with what exactly?
Well, it's certainly surprising that it fails entirely. And if we
actually wanted to reject the case, it should be drawing an apropos
error message. The fact is that this failure is just an implementation
issue.
> Our users will be surprised to find this was at the top of our list
If it had taken more than five lines of code to fix, I might agree with
you. But we don't stop fixing bugs just because commitfest is on,
especially not trivial ones.
regards, tom lane
