X-Original-To: pgsql-sql-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED0CA9DCDD0 for ; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 11:46:36 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 63510-05 for ; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 11:46:41 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B0DF9DCDD4 for ; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 11:46:33 -0400 (AST) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id k0CFkbBE005203; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:46:37 -0500 (EST) To: Dirk Jagdmann cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org Subject: Re: foreign keys with on delete cascade and triggers In-reply-to: <5d0f60990601120349x11df4f30yfcbfbb7e2adae227@mail.gmail.com> References: <5d0f60990601111456m136aff2se77e354354a1c6aa@mail.gmail.com> <331.1137034941@sss.pgh.pa.us> <5d0f60990601120349x11df4f30yfcbfbb7e2adae227@mail.gmail.com> Comments: In-reply-to Dirk Jagdmann message dated "Thu, 12 Jan 2006 12:49:27 +0100" Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:46:37 -0500 Message-ID: <5202.1137080797@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.086 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.086] X-Spam-Score: 0.086 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200601/51 X-Sequence-Number: 23840 Dirk Jagdmann writes: > Now I'd like to know if the current order of deletions in PostgreSQL > is intended in the top-down way or if that could be changed? Sorry, I don't see much chance of changing it. regards, tom lane