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

Re: [GENERAL] Need concrete "Why Postgres not MySQL" bullet list

From: Ian Barwick <barwick(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: shridhar_daithankar(at)persistent(dot)co(dot)in,pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Need concrete "Why Postgres not MySQL" bullet list
Date: 2003-08-21 20:28:52
Message-ID: 200308212228.52535.barwick@gmx.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacypgsql-generalpgsql-hackers
On Thursday 21 August 2003 11:15, Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
> On 21 Aug 2003 at 0:22, Ian Barwick wrote:
> > * DDL
> > - Data definition language (table creation statements etc.) in MySQL
> > are not transaction based and cannot be rolled back.
>
> Just wondering, what other databases has transactable DDLs? oracle seems to
> have autonomous transactions which is arthogonal.

DB2 8.1 seems to support transaction-capable DDL. At least, a rollback
following a CREATE TABLE causes the table to disappear. Haven't gone
into it in any depth.


Ian Barwick
barwick(at)gmx(dot)net




In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2003-08-21 20:42:20
Subject: Re: [SQL] "SELECT IN" Still Broken in 7.4b
Previous:From: Andrew SullivanDate: 2003-08-21 20:22:37
Subject: Re: Buglist

pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Ian BarwickDate: 2003-08-21 20:43:40
Subject: Re: Need concrete "Why Postgres not MySQL" bullet
Previous:From: Ian BarwickDate: 2003-08-21 20:19:57
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] [HACKERS] Need concrete "Why Postgres not MySQL" bullet list

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: Edmund DenglerDate: 2003-08-21 20:42:24
Subject: Re: Buglist
Previous:From: Andrew SullivanDate: 2003-08-21 20:22:37
Subject: Re: Buglist

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