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

From: Zeugswetter Andreas SEV <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at>
To: "'Vadim Mikheev'" <vadim(at)krs(dot)ru>
Cc: "'PostgreSQL Developers List'" <hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: AW: AW: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] drop/rename table and transaction s
Date: 1999-11-26 10:29:44
Message-ID: 219F68D65015D011A8E000006F8590C603FDC199@sdexcsrv1.f000.d0188.sd.spardat.at
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> So, you see that this idea came not to Oracle only...
>
> I don't object against DDLs inside BEGIN/END.

Yes, I know. All I object against is, that a DDL statement commits
my previous update/insert/delete statements.

> I just mean that it's not required by standard.
> If someone is ready to fix this area - welcome.

imho it is ok, to disallow ddl inside transaction,
until somebody fixes rollback.

>
> Vadim
> P.S. Is DROP TABLE rollback-able in Informix, Andreas?

Yes.

Andreas

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message jose soares 1999-11-26 14:25:24 Re: [HACKERS] substring extraction
Previous Message Vadim Mikheev 1999-11-26 10:12:01 Re: AW: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] drop/rename table and transactions