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: 219F68D65015D011A8E000006F8590C603FDC196@sdexcsrv1.f000.d0188.sd.spardat.at
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
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.

Andreas

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

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