Re: [HACKERS] DROP TABLE inside a transaction block - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: [HACKERS] DROP TABLE inside a transaction block
Date
Msg-id 200003080151.UAA08198@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] DROP TABLE inside a transaction block  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> >> BTW, we are not *that* far from being able to roll back a DROP TABLE.
> >> The only thing that's really needed is for everyone to take a deep
> >> breath and let go of the notion that table files ought to be named
> >> after the tables.  If we named table files after the OIDs of their
> >> tables, then rollback-able DROP or RENAME TABLE would be pretty
> >> straightforward.  If you don't recall why this is, consult the
> >> pghackers archives...
> 
> > The oid will be appended to the base file name.
> 
> If we do it that way, then RENAME TABLE will be kinda complicated...
> not impossible, but is it worth it?

100% worth it.  Ingres doesn't use table names in the file name, and
administration is a mess.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026
 


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] xlog.c.patch for cygwin port.
Next
From: "D. Jay Newman"
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] xlog.c.patch for cygwin port.