On 2 Jun 2006 at 9:16, lobolo2000 wrote:

>> Nope. This order prevents conflicts with other transactions.
>
>Shouldn't the 'on delete cascade' mechanism be equivalent to a 'before
>delete' trigger that deletes detail records?

No.

> The way it seems to be
>implemented with is the equivalent of an 'after delete' trigger,
>unless I am missing something.

And this is right implementation.

>Isn't this a violation of referential integrity?

No, because referential integrity can be violated inside one
statement. Even more: according to standard, it can be violated even
inside of transaction. Fortunatelly, FB does not support deferred
constraints.

--
SY, Dimitry Sibiryakov.