Re: Transactional DDL
От | Ron Johnson |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Transactional DDL |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4661B94E.7050904@cox.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Transactional DDL ("Harpreet Dhaliwal" <harpreet.dhaliwal01@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Transactional DDL
|
Список | pgsql-general |
You were politely asked not to top-post. On 06/02/07 11:46, Harpreet Dhaliwal wrote: > So, while writing any technical document, would it be wrong to mention > stored procedures in postgresql? > what is the general convention? Did I miss something? What does "stored procedures" have to do with "Transactional DDL"? > On 6/2/07, Dawid Kuroczko <qnex42@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On 6/2/07, Jasbinder Singh Bali <jsbali@gmail.com> wrote: >> > But its said that transactions in any RDBMS follow ACID properties. >> > So if i put a create table and an Insert statement in the same begin >> end >> > block as one single transactioin, won't both create and insert follow >> acid >> > property, being in one single trasaction, and either both get committed >> or >> > none, talking about oracle lets say >> >> Actually, Oracle inserts implicit COMMIT after each DDL. >> >> So, if you have: >> >> BEGIN; >> INSERT INTO foo (bar) VALUES (1); >> CREATE INDEX foo_bar ON foo (bar); >> -- Here Oracle will insert implicit COMMIT, thus your foo table will >> have value 1 commited. >> -- And here Oracle will BEGIN a new trasaction. >> INSERT INTO foo (bar) VALUES (2); >> ROLLBACK; >> -- And you will rollback the insert of value 2. Value 1 remains in the >> table, >> -- because it is already committed. >> >> Regards, >> Dawid -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day. Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good!
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: