David Fetter wrote:
> > My vote is to just go ahead and change it. I don't really see much
> > of a use-case for truncating only the parent of an inheritance
> > hierarchy anyway, so I doubt that many people would be affected.
>
> Here's one such use-case. Let's say a table has gotten large and
> you've decided to partition it. You add child tables, add one or more
> triggers to the parent table to make sure it never gets a row,
> populate the child tables from the parent table, then you want to
> remove all the rows from the parent table.
>
> TRUNCATE ONLY handles this case just fine, so long as there's a clear
> message in the release notes. :)
Agreed. The good thing is that I don't imagine what you have described
above would be scripted so someone would be typing that and hopefully
know the current behavior.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +