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

Re: [HACKERS] DROP TABLE inside a transaction block

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com, peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] DROP TABLE inside a transaction block
Date: 2000-03-07 16:47:15
Message-ID: 20410.952447635@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp> 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...

> So what was the conclusion for 7.0?

Too late to consider it for 7.0, I think.  I'd like to see it happen in
7.1 or 7.2 or so.

>> Disallow DROP TABLE/DROP INDEX inside a transaction block

> We should remove above from HISTORY, no?

Yes, it's not correct.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Thomas LockhartDate: 2000-03-07 16:57:45
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] library policy question
Previous:From: Patrick WelcheDate: 2000-03-07 16:40:31
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] alter_table.sql

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