Re: Transactional DDL

From: "Jaime Casanova" <systemguards(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: PFC <lists(at)peufeu(dot)com>
Cc: "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 22:46:43
Message-ID: c2d9e70e0706021546h6881345doa2c2d57e62b27801@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On 6/2/07, PFC <lists(at)peufeu(dot)com> wrote:
>
> >> This is what happens in every RDBMS. Whats so special about postgres
> >> then?
>
> mysql> BEGIN;
> Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.00 sec)
>
> mysql> CREATE TABLE blehhhh ( id INTEGER ) ENGINE=InnoDB;
> Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.09 sec)
>
> mysql> INSERT INTO blehhhh VALUES (1),(2),(3);
> Query OK, 3 rows affected (0.02 sec)
> Records: 3 Duplicates: 0 Warnings: 0
>
> mysql> ROLLBACK;
> Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.00 sec)
>
> mysql> SELECT * FROM blehhhh;
> +------+
> | id |
> +------+
> | 1 |
> | 2 |
> | 3 |
> +------+
> 3 rows in set (0.00 sec)
>
>

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.
if that is the case this 3 rows should have been gone with the
rollback.

--
regards,
Jaime Casanova

"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to
build bigger and better idiot-proof programs and the universe trying
to produce bigger and better idiots.
So far, the universe is winning."
Richard Cook

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jaime Casanova 2007-06-02 22:51:15 Re: Transactional DDL
Previous Message Madison Kelly 2007-06-02 22:45:21 Re: High-availability