Re: Should this require CASCADE? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Should this require CASCADE?
Date
Msg-id 8969.1026356942@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Should this require CASCADE?  ("Groff, Dana" <Dana.Groff@filetek.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
"Groff, Dana" <Dana.Groff@filetek.com> writes:
> Actually, the answer is even clearer, the standard calls for the specification
> of "CASCADE" or "RESTRICT" and doesn't support _not_ having that specified.
> (the <drop behavior> is NOT [drop behavior] aka optional)

Right, the spec does not allow it to be defaulted.  We will, however,
since the alternative is breaking every PG application that uses DROP.

Defaulting to RESTRICT behavior seems a reasonably safe way of
preserving as much backwards compatibility as we can.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bradley Baetz
Date:
Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] [pgaccess-users] RE: bugzilla.pgaccess.org
Next
From: Bradley Baetz
Date:
Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] [pgaccess-users] RE: bugzilla.pgaccess.org