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

Re: Table rewrites vs. pending AFTER triggers

From: "Gokulakannan Somasundaram" <gokul007(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Andrew Dunstan" <adunstan(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Table rewrites vs. pending AFTER triggers
Date: 2008-01-03 07:38:47
Message-ID: 9362e74e0801022338j436b0056r2a421e7f38b32fa6@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Jan 3, 2008 12:44 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> "Gokulakannan Somasundaram" <gokul007(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > I actually mean to say that DDLs can be declared as self-committing.
>
> Egad, an Oracle lover in our midst.


:). True, its an impact of working more with Oracle. I made the suggestion
here, because it might reduce some if conditions.

>
>
> Most of us think that roll-back-able DDL is one of the best features of
> Postgres, and certainly one of our best selling points vis-a-vis Oracle.
> Don't expect us to give it up.


Can you please explain, any specific use-case where DDLs are necessary
within a transaction?

-- 
Thanks,
Gokul.

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: David FetterDate: 2008-01-03 08:11:00
Subject: Re: Table rewrites vs. pending AFTER triggers
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2008-01-03 07:14:49
Subject: Re: Table rewrites vs. pending AFTER triggers

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