| From: | Jan Wieck <janwieck(at)yahoo(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Jan Wieck <janwieck(at)yahoo(dot)com>, "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>, Vince Vielhaber <vev(at)michvhf(dot)com>, Mike Mascari <mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Vote totals for SET in aborted transaction |
| Date: | 2002-04-26 15:15:08 |
| Message-ID: | 200204261515.g3QFF9C16210@saturn.janwieck.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> So you do see a difference between SET and DROP TABLE because the second
> is a utility command. OK, I'll buy that, but my point was different.
>
> My point was that we don't match Oracle for DROP TABLE, so why is
> matching for SET so important?
Good point, I never understood the compatibility issue on
this level either. Applications that create/drop tables at
runtime are IMNSVHO self-modifying code. Thus, I don't
consider it a big porting issue. Applications that do it
should be "replaced", not ported.
Jan
--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com #
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-04-26 15:20:52 | Re: Vote totals for SET in aborted transaction |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-04-26 15:10:18 | Re: PSQL \x \l command issues |