From: | Peter Eisentraut <e99re41(at)DoCS(dot)UU(dot)SE> |
---|---|
To: | Philip Warner <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au> |
Cc: | Mike Mascari <mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com>, Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] DROP TABLE inside a transaction block |
Date: | 2000-03-06 10:10:54 |
Message-ID: | Pine.GSO.4.02A.10003061108220.19000-100000@Svan.DoCS.UU.SE |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 6 Mar 2000, Philip Warner wrote:
> >I don't see a problem with disallowing some DDL commands in a transaction
> >as long as they throw an error and the transaction aborts.
>
> Is it really necessary to abort the TX? Seems a little antisocial - can't
> you just return an error, and let the user/application decide if it needs
> to abort?
I'm afraid yes, it is necessary. Either the whole transaction or none of
it. Anything else is opening a can of worms that you can't control unless
you have a Ph.D. in fancy databases or something. (Incidentally, I know
that a non-zero amount of people around here have one of those, but that
won't help the rest of us much. :{ )
--
Peter Eisentraut Sernanders väg 10:115
peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net 75262 Uppsala
http://yi.org/peter-e/ Sweden
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Zeugswetter Andreas SB | 2000-03-06 10:27:43 | AW: AW: [HACKERS] DROP TABLE inside a transaction block |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2000-03-06 10:08:04 | Re: AW: [HACKERS] DROP TABLE inside a transaction block |