Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [HACKERS] DROP TABLE inside a transaction block

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Mike Mascari <mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] DROP TABLE inside a transaction block
Date: 2000-03-08 01:51:34
Message-ID: 200003080151.UAA08198@candle.pha.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> >> BTW, we are not *that* far from being able to roll back a DROP TABLE.
> >> The only thing that's really needed is for everyone to take a deep
> >> breath and let go of the notion that table files ought to be named
> >> after the tables.  If we named table files after the OIDs of their
> >> tables, then rollback-able DROP or RENAME TABLE would be pretty
> >> straightforward.  If you don't recall why this is, consult the
> >> pghackers archives...
> 
> > The oid will be appended to the base file name.
> 
> If we do it that way, then RENAME TABLE will be kinda complicated...
> not impossible, but is it worth it?

100% worth it.  Ingres doesn't use table names in the file name, and
administration is a mess.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle
  pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us               |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: D. Jay NewmanDate: 2000-03-08 02:48:28
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] xlog.c.patch for cygwin port.
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2000-03-08 01:50:07
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] xlog.c.patch for cygwin port.

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group