Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Need concrete "Why Postgres not MySQL"

Shridhar Daithankar wrote:

>On 21 Aug 2003 at 9:21, Greg Stark wrote:
>
>
>
>>Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de> writes:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>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.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>M$ SQL2000 has (and previous versions had too, I believe)
>>>
>>>
>
>Any pointers to documentation?
>
>
No, just looked at the doc and didn't find anything, it's assumed
implicitely at some locations though.
DDL statement will create a Schema Modification lock (Sch-M), i.e. DDL
statements pending in a transaction will lock a table exclusively. After
commit or rollback, schema modification is committed or undone as
expected, I verified this.

Regards,
Andreas