On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 2:53 PM, Darren Duncan <darren@darrenduncan.net> wrote: > I still think the syntax of TRUNCATE FOR EACH ROW would be useful, but if no one agrees...
I'm compelled to disagree.
What was useful about TRUNCATE in the first place was that it quickly operated against the entire table.
If you want to change that to row-by-row processing, then it is actually a little bit worse than DELETE FROM some_table, in that it is introducing an irregularity in language that no longer provides any corresponding benefit. (e.g. - such as that TRUNCATE is fast).
If you want to be certain of doing row-by-row processing, then the better answer is to: a) Use DELETE instead in your application, and b) Put a guard on to prevent using TRUNCATE. (e.g. - attach triggers that react to TRUNCATE with "go away, don't bother me!")
I observe that the Slony replication system initially implemented that 'guard' approach when TRUNCATE triggers were first provided, until we came up with a suitable strategy to capture and replicate the TRUNCATE request.
-- When confronted by a difficult problem, solve it by reducing it to the question, "How would the Lone Ranger handle this?"
