| From: | Giuseppe Sacco <giuseppe(at)eppesuigoccas(dot)homedns(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: DDL in transactions? |
| Date: | 2005-04-01 07:13:14 |
| Message-ID: | 1112339594.3809.14.camel@localhost |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-jdbc |
Il giorno gio, 31-03-2005 alle 11:09 -0500, Kris Jurka ha scritto:
[...]
> > My question is: why? Shouldn't DDL be executed immediately?
>
> No. DDL in postgresql is fully transactable and may be rolled back or
> committed. That doesn't explain why the above code doesn't work.
> Because the two executeUpdates are on the same Statement on the same
> Connection the second execution should see the newly created table because
> it is in the same transaction. Perhaps you are not showing us the real
> code you are using and you actually have two connections?
Hi Kris,
you was right: I used two different connections.
BTW, is it possible to disable this behaviour and have DDL statement
immediately executed?
Thanks,
Giuseppe
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kris Jurka | 2005-04-01 07:32:30 | Re: DDL in transactions? |
| Previous Message | Nico | 2005-04-01 01:16:46 | only postgresqsl in connection pool |