Re: Should this require CASCADE?

Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> Now, if someone wanted to say CASCADE|RESTRICT was
> required for DROP _only_ if there is some foreign key references to the
> table, I would be OK with that, but that's not what the standard says.

But in fact that is not different from what I propose to do.  Consider
what such a rule really means:* if no dependencies exist for the object, go ahead and delete.* if dependencies exist,
complain.
How is that different from "the default behavior is RESTRICT"?
        regards, tom lane