| From: | "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> |
|---|---|
| To: | <lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org>, "Bruce Momjian" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Gavin Sherry" <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au>, "Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Linux Journal Editors Choice Awards |
| Date: | 2002-09-03 03:09:17 |
| Message-ID: | GNELIHDDFBOCMGBFGEFOCEAFCEAA.chriskl@familyhealth.com.au |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> 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
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2002-09-03 03:13:51 | Another use of check (a is not null) |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-09-03 02:48:02 | Re: Linux Journal Editors Choice Awards |