Re: autocommit vs TRUNCATE et al - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD
Subject Re: autocommit vs TRUNCATE et al
Date
Msg-id 46C15C39FEB2C44BA555E356FBCD6FA4961ECD@m0114.s-mxs.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to autocommit vs TRUNCATE et al  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
> What I just committed uses your idea of auto-committing TRUNCATE et al,
> but now that I review the thread I think that everyone else thought that
> that was a dangerous idea.  How do you feel about simply throwing an error
> in autocommit-off mode, instead?  (At least it's a localized
> change now)

Well, if I can throw in another opinion, I think what you did is perfect.
It will make Oracle users happy too. Only very shrewd applications would
commit previous changes with a "truncate" statement, and those will learn
to issue a commit before truncate. I don't like the solutions involving
"set autocommit ...".

Andreas


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andrew Sullivan
Date:
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Hot Backup
Next
From: Andrew Sullivan
Date:
Subject: Re: Disabling triggers (was Re: pgsql 7.2.3 crash)