Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C077047618C for ; Mon, 9 Sep 2002 14:35:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.gmx.net (mail.gmx.net [213.165.64.20]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9EC56476086 for ; Mon, 9 Sep 2002 14:35:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 31434 invoked by uid 0); 9 Sep 2002 18:35:44 -0000 Received: from pd902f084.dip0.t-ipconnect.de (217.2.240.132) by mail.gmx.net (mp017-rz3) with SMTP; 9 Sep 2002 18:35:44 -0000 Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2002 20:40:23 +0200 (CEST) From: Peter Eisentraut X-X-Sender: peter@localhost.localdomain To: Rod Taylor Cc: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org Subject: Re: RESTRICT / CASCADE In-Reply-To: <1031427051.15580.11.camel@jester> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS new-20020517 X-Archive-Number: 200209/26 X-Sequence-Number: 1478 Rod Taylor writes: > If the defaults are different, perhaps the documentation should show > it's examples using RESTRICT or CASCADE explicitly? Well, we're describing PostgreSQL, not other database systems that might act differently. I believe most SQL guides/books/courses/etc. simply use DROP TABLE name; and this has also been historical practice in PostgreSQL, so we would confuse users pretty heavily by adding RESTRICT or CASCADE everywhere. Also, in most examples the choice between RESTRICT and CASCADE would have to be arbitrarily made by the documentation writer and might not be what the user really wanted to do. -- Peter Eisentraut peter_e@gmx.net