| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Jaime Casanova" <systemguards(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PFC <lists(at)peufeu(dot)com>, "Harpreet Dhaliwal" <harpreet(dot)dhaliwal01(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Jasbinder Singh Bali" <jsbali(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Michael Glaesemann" <grzm(at)seespotcode(dot)net>, "Alexander Staubo" <alex(at)purefiction(dot)net>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Transactional DDL |
| Date: | 2007-06-02 23:39:11 |
| Message-ID: | 28530.1180827551@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
"Jaime Casanova" <systemguards(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Tom's example seems to show that mysql inserts a commit immidiatelly
> after a DDL but this one example shows the thing is worse than that.
Actually, I think their behavior is just "DDL issues a COMMIT", so that
after that you are out of the transaction and the INSERT commits
immediately. Some experimentation shows that mysql doesn't issue a
warning for rollback-outside-a-transaction, so the lack of any complaint
at the rollback step is just standard mysql-ism.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Guy Rouillier | 2007-06-03 04:19:59 | Re: multimaster |
| Previous Message | Alexander Staubo | 2007-06-02 23:18:51 | Re: High-availability |