Re: Table rewrites vs. pending AFTER triggers - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Gokulakannan Somasundaram
Subject Re: Table rewrites vs. pending AFTER triggers
Date
Msg-id 9362e74e0801022338j436b0056r2a421e7f38b32fa6@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Table rewrites vs. pending AFTER triggers  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Table rewrites vs. pending AFTER triggers  (David Fetter <david@fetter.org>)
Re: Table rewrites vs. pending AFTER triggers  (Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org>)
Re: Table rewrites vs. pending AFTER triggers  ("Albe Laurenz" <laurenz.albe@wien.gv.at>)
List pgsql-hackers


On Jan 3, 2008 12:44 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
"Gokulakannan Somasundaram" <gokul007@gmail.com> writes:
> I actually mean to say that DDLs can be declared as self-committing.

Egad, an Oracle lover in our midst.

:). 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.

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Table rewrites vs. pending AFTER triggers
Next
From: David Fetter
Date:
Subject: Re: Table rewrites vs. pending AFTER triggers