On May 3, 2008, at 9:56 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
This is a great deal less efficient than TRUNCATE, but it's secure for concurrent insertions, which TRUNCATE is definitely not.
Exactly my question; thank you! -- Xof
On May 3, 2008, at 9:56 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
This is a great deal less efficient than TRUNCATE, but it's secure for concurrent insertions, which TRUNCATE is definitely not.
Exactly my question; thank you! -- Xof
|