Re: Notes on converting from MySQL 5.0.x to PostgreSQL
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Notes on converting from MySQL 5.0.x to PostgreSQL |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 24462.1151682647@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Notes on converting from MySQL 5.0.x to PostgreSQL (Ron Johnson <ron.l.johnson@cox.net>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
Ron Johnson <ron.l.johnson@cox.net> writes: > Scott Marlowe wrote: >> However, the more interesting thing here, is that every >> statement, including DDL is transactable, except for a couple of >> big odd ones, like create database. So, in postgresql, you can do: > But isn't that what it means to be "transactional"? Or am I spoiled > by my "big, expensive enterprise database"? Being able to roll back DDL (table-schema modifications) isn't that common. Since PG keeps most of its schema information in tables, we have it easier than some other systems supporting DDL rollback, but it's still tricky. As an example, a long time ago we used to name table files after the table and database directories after the database, which made it easy to see what was what under $PGDATA, but prevented a lot of DDL from being transactional. For instance BEGIN; DROP TABLE foo; CREATE TABLE foo (some-new-definition); ROLLBACK; couldn't work because there would need to be two physical files named foo in the interim until you commit or roll back. ALTER TABLE RENAME had some related problems. Now we name all the filesystem objects using OIDs that can be chosen to never collide, even if they belong to database objects with similar names. Last I checked, mysql was still using table names for file names, so they're on the wrong side of this. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: