Re: Table rewrites vs. pending AFTER triggers
| От | Gokulakannan Somasundaram |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Table rewrites vs. pending AFTER triggers |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 9362e74e0801022338j436b0056r2a421e7f38b32fa6@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Table rewrites vs. pending AFTER triggers (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Table rewrites vs. pending AFTER triggers
Re: Table rewrites vs. pending AFTER triggers Re: Table rewrites vs. pending AFTER triggers |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Jan 3, 2008 12:44 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
:). True, its an impact of working more with Oracle. I made the suggestion here, because it might reduce some if conditions.
Can you please explain, any specific use-case where DDLs are necessary within a transaction?
-- "Gokulakannan Somasundaram" <gokul007@gmail.com> writes:Egad, an Oracle lover in our midst.
> I actually mean to say that DDLs can be declared as self-committing.
:). True, its an impact of working more with Oracle. I made the suggestion here, because it might reduce some if conditions.
Most of us think that roll-back-able DDL is one of the best features of
Postgres, and certainly one of our best selling points vis-a-vis Oracle.
Don't expect us to give it up.
Can you please explain, any specific use-case where DDLs are necessary within a transaction?
Thanks,
Gokul.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: