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

• Re: Table rewrites vs. pending AFTER triggers at 2008-01-03 07:14:49 from Tom Lane

Responses

• Re: Table rewrites vs. pending AFTER triggers at 2008-01-03 08:11:00 from David Fetter
• Re: Table rewrites vs. pending AFTER triggers at 2008-01-03 10:23:31 from Martijn van Oosterhout
• Re: Table rewrites vs. pending AFTER triggers at 2008-01-03 10:55:40 from Albe Laurenz

pgsql-hackers by date

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