Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

Thread: AW: [HACKERS] TRANSACTIONS

AW: [HACKERS] TRANSACTIONS

From
Zeugswetter Andreas SB
Date:
>  AFAIK, MS Access have no transactions inside it,
>  Informix (at least old versions I worked with) always 
>  perform create,drop, alter object outside transaction 
>  but IMHO it's not right behavior.

MS Access has transactions and Informix (Version 5.00 - 9.20) performs 
create, drop, alter inside the transaction, same as Oracle and DB2.

>  I believe postgres's behavior more meaningful, 
> but IMHO, this example is quite far from real life.

I am pretty sure that the behavior of the others
is the standard.

What PostgreSQL currently also lacks, to make this really useful
is ANSI SQL SQLSTATE (most others also have an int sqlcode), 
so you can decide wether this certain error can be ignored or fixed 
inside this transaction. 
The string parsing we can do is far from optimal. 

Andreas

RE: AW: [HACKERS] TRANSACTIONS

From
Dmitry Samersoff
Date:
On 23-Feb-2000 Zeugswetter Andreas SB wrote:
> 
>>  AFAIK, MS Access have no transactions inside it,
>>  Informix (at least old versions I worked with) always 
>>  perform create,drop, alter object outside transaction 
>>  but IMHO it's not right behavior.
> 
> MS Access has transactions and Informix (Version 5.00 - 9.20) performs 
> create, drop, alter inside the transaction, same as Oracle and DB2.

OK. May be I miss something.

-- 
Dmitry Samersoff, dms@wplus.net, ICQ:3161705
http://devnull.wplus.net
* There will come soft rains ...

Re: AW: [HACKERS] TRANSACTIONS

From
Mike Mascari
Date:
Dmitry Samersoff wrote:
> 
> On 23-Feb-2000 Zeugswetter Andreas SB wrote:
> >
> >>  AFAIK, MS Access have no transactions inside it,
> >>  Informix (at least old versions I worked with) always
> >>  perform create,drop, alter object outside transaction
> >>  but IMHO it's not right behavior.
> >
> > MS Access has transactions and Informix (Version 5.00 - 9.20) performs
> > create, drop, alter inside the transaction, same as Oracle and DB2.
     ^^^^^^
 
> 
> OK. May be I miss something.

I don't think so. Not with respect to Oracle. Andreas knows that
Oracle implicitly commits your running transaction -- and starts
a new one whenever a DDL statement is encountered. A large
discussion about this arose about 4 months ago...I can't speak
for DB2.

> 
> --
> Dmitry Samersoff, dms@wplus.net, ICQ:3161705
> http://devnull.wplus.net
> * There will come soft rains ...
> 
> ************