RE: [HACKERS] DROP TABLE inside transaction block

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
> [mailto:owner-pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org]On Behalf Of Tom Lane
> Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 1999 10:54 PM
> To: Jos·Soares
> Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] DROP TABLE inside transaction block
>
>
> =?iso-8859-1?Q?Jos=E9?= Soares <jose(at)sferacarta(dot)com> writes:
> > Seems a good solution. I have an old note about this problem.
> > What about to reject also the following commands inside transactions?
>
> > * BUGS: There are some commands that doesn't work properly
> > inside transactions. Users should NOT use the following
> > statements inside transactions:
>
> > - DROP TABLE -- in case of ROLLBACK only table structure
> > will be recovered, data will be
> > lost.
> > - CREATE VIEWS -- the behavior of the backend is unpredictable.
> > - ALTER TABLE -- the behavior of the backend is unpredictable.
> > - CREATE DATABASE -- in case of ROLLBACK will be removed references
> > from "pg_database" but directory
> > $PGDATA/databasename will not be removed.
>
> CREATE DATABASE (and presumably also DROP DATABASE) probably should
> refuse to run inside a transaction.
>

Probably VACUUM should also refuse to run inside transactions.
VACUUM has a phase like commit in the middle of execution.

Regards.

Hiroshi Inoue
Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp