Re: why postgresql over other RDBMS

From: Thomas Kellerer <spam_eater(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: why postgresql over other RDBMS
Date: 2007-05-24 22:26:27
Message-ID: f353ej$m1m$1@sea.gmane.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Alexander Staubo wrote on 24.05.2007 17:30:
> [2] Nobody else has this, I believe, except possibly Ingres and
> NonStop SQL. This means you can do a "begin transaction", then issue
> "create table", "alter table", etc. ad nauseum, and in the mean time
> concurrent transactions will just work. Beautiful for atomically
> upgrading a production server. Oracle, of course, commits after each
> DDL statements.

I do have to commit a CREATE TABLE in SQL Server (Express) 2005 (and I believe
in 2000 as well), and I can rollback a DROP TABLE.
I haven't checked how this behaves with concurrent access though.

Thomas

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2007-05-24 22:32:23 Re: why postgresql over other RDBMS
Previous Message Chris Browne 2007-05-24 22:21:24 Re: why postgresql over other RDBMS