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

AW: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] drop/rename table and transactions

From: Zeugswetter Andreas SEV <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at>
To: "'PostgreSQL Developers List'" <hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: AW: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] drop/rename table and transactions
Date: 1999-11-26 09:38:15
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Vadim wrote:
> > The developers appear to want to make them 
> > work (i.e., have the
> > ability to rollback a DROP TABLE, ALTER TABLE ADD COLUMN, 
> > etc.). This, in my
> > opinion, goes far above and beyond the call of duty for a 
> >  RDBMS. Oracle issues
> > an implicit COMMIT whenever a DDL statement is found. 
> And I agreed with this.

And I strongly disagree. 
This sounds like pushing the flush button in the toilet,
and instead of the toilet flushing you get a shower.

How could anybody come to the idea that a DDL statement 
also does a commit work if inside a transaction ?

Now this sound so absurd, that I even doubt Oracle would do this.



pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Vadim MikheevDate: 1999-11-26 10:12:01
Subject: Re: AW: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] drop/rename table and transactions
Previous:From: Lincoln YeohDate: 1999-11-26 09:04:09
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] locking/insert into table and transactions

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group