> Actually, Linux Journal (and their editors) are fans of PostgreSQL.
>
> This year, MySQL may actually have clued in to transactions and a few
> other big database features. I don't know that they actually *have*
> these features polished up, but LJ is giving them credit for trying...
It still disturbs me that you have to use a non-standard table type to
support transactions, plus the hijinks that will occur when you attempt to
perform a transaction that involves changes to transactional and
non-transactional tables...
"If you do a ROLLBACK when you have updated a non-transactional table you
will get an error (ER_WARNING_NOT_COMPLETE_ROLLBACK) as a warning. All
transactional safe tables will be restored but any non-transactional table
will not change."
Chris
