Re: [HACKERS] DROP TABLE inside a transaction block
От | Mike Mascari |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] DROP TABLE inside a transaction block |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 38C60A51.43B7BF5@mascari.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] DROP TABLE inside a transaction block (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] DROP TABLE inside a transaction block
Re: [HACKERS] DROP TABLE inside a transaction block RE: [HACKERS] DROP TABLE inside a transaction block |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Can I throw one more question out there on this subject? There's something that I view as inconsistent behavior with respect to DDL statements and MVCC and was wondering if this would have any impact on the discussion (the following is with 6.5.3): Session #1: emptoris=> begin; BEGIN emptoris=> select * from test; value ----- 1 (1 row) Session #2: emptoris=> begin; BEGIN emptoris=> select * from test; value ----- 1 (1 row) Session #1: emptoris=> drop table test; DROP Session #2: emptoris=> select * from test; ERROR: mdopen: couldn't open test: No such file or directory Now it would seem to me that if DROP TABLE is going to be ROLLBACK-able, then Session #2, in a MVCC environment should never see: ERROR: mdopen: couldn't open test: No such file or directory but it does, because the "effect" of the drop table is an action that is seen by all sessions, as though it were "committed". So I am now wondering, are there any Multi-Versioning/Multi-Generational RDBMS that support ROLLBACK-able DDL statements in transactions... Just curious, Mike Mascari
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: