Re: Transactional DDL - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Ron Johnson
Subject Re: Transactional DDL
Date
Msg-id 4661B94E.7050904@cox.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Transactional DDL  ("Harpreet Dhaliwal" <harpreet.dhaliwal01@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Transactional DDL  ("Leif B. Kristensen" <leif@solumslekt.org>)
List 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!


pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Andrew Sullivan
Date:
Subject: Re: Slightly OT.
Next
From: Russ Brown
Date:
Subject: Re: Transactional DDL