| From: | "Shridhar Daithankar" <shridhar_daithankar(at)persistent(dot)co(dot)in> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Need concrete "Why Postgres not MySQL" bullet list |
| Date: | 2003-08-21 09:15:03 |
| Message-ID: | 3F44DAEF.12397.2F03A5@localhost |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
On 21 Aug 2003 at 0:22, Ian Barwick wrote:
> * DDL
> - Data definition language (table creation statements etc.) in MySQL
> are not transaction based and cannot be rolled back.
Just wondering, what other databases has transactable DDLs? oracle seems to
have autonomous transactions which is arthogonal.
If we are going to compare it, we are going to need it against other databases
as well.
Personally I find transactable DDL's a big plus of postgresql. It allows real
funcky application design at times..:-)
Bye
Shridhar
--
drug, n: A substance that, injected into a rat, produces a scientific paper.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andreas Pflug | 2003-08-21 10:30:58 | Re: [HACKERS] Need concrete "Why Postgres not MySQL" |
| Previous Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2003-08-21 01:42:45 | Re: Need concrete "Why Postgres not MySQL" bullet list |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jason Godden | 2003-08-21 10:05:23 | Re: Bulk Insert / Update / Delete |
| Previous Message | Shridhar Daithankar | 2003-08-21 09:10:52 | Re: Buglist |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dani Oderbolz | 2003-08-21 10:05:14 | Re: "SELECT IN" Still Broken in 7.4b |
| Previous Message | Shridhar Daithankar | 2003-08-21 09:10:52 | Re: Buglist |