Re: autocommit vs TRUNCATE et al

On Fri, 18 Oct 2002, Mike Mascari wrote:

> Gavin Sherry wrote:
> > On Fri, 18 Oct 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> > 
> > 
> >>Anyone see a way out of this catch-22?  If not, which is the least
> >>bad alternative?
> > 
> > 
> > Ultimately, fix TRUNCATE to be transaction safe. This is non-trivial,
> > I know :-).
> > 
> > Regardless, the first option seems the less of the two evils.
> 
> Even though TRUNCATE was modeled after Oracle's TRUNCATE and 
> Oracle's TRUNCATE commits the running tx, truncates the 
> relation, and starts a new tx, regardless of whether or not 
> TRUNCATE is the first statement of the tx?

Why should we be *only* as good as Oracle? :-)

Gavin