Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
