X-Original-To: pgsql-general-postgresql.org@postgresql.org Received: from localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D1129FA603 for ; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 12:40:25 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 55056-03 for ; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 12:40:09 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from nz-out-0102.google.com (nz-out-0102.google.com [64.233.162.194]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B5C69FA163 for ; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 12:40:08 -0300 (ADT) Received: by nz-out-0102.google.com with SMTP id m7so178903nzf for ; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 08:40:05 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-mailer:in-reply-to:x-mimeole:thread-index; b=LJDMJsh5ioxqbtK9soB0nmOL+vsnpJFjqUTuhKCB0ErejvsDKm/0JoNJ5lI4UsTYQK6fnSVeRgmSoOWMaFLxZTSLbRST8vSkluR7xVDRNSFPBRvsBrodub2ykJ1woTZebGec0BXoqGaECmuzRotforSNjJreskvItKe5G7FGel4= Received: by 10.64.179.6 with SMTP id b6mr1065035qbf; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 08:40:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from parzifal ( [69.181.188.179]) by mx.gmail.com with ESMTP id p4sm210670qba.2006.06.30.08.40.03; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 08:40:04 -0700 (PDT) From: "paul rivers" To: "'pgsql general'" Subject: Re: Notes on converting from MySQL 5.0.x to PostgreSQL Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 08:40:03 -0700 Message-ID: <002001c69c5b$75d33210$10d09888@parzifal> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: <44A5418F.8040901@cox.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 thread-index: AcacWTpBV3Ragc2dQEiIj2cQ3sUtzQAAZu4g X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200606/1224 X-Sequence-Number: 97596 Out of curiosity, which "big, expensive enterprise database" are you spoiled by? Many that I support do not allow DDL within an transaction, or if they allow it, there are many caveats and rules. -----Original Message----- From: pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org [mailto:pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Ron Johnson Sent: Friday, June 30, 2006 8:22 AM To: pgsql general Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Notes on converting from MySQL 5.0.x to PostgreSQL -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Scott Marlowe wrote: [snip] > However, the more interesting thing here, is that every > statement, including DDL is transactable, except for a couple of > big odd ones, like create database. So, in postgresql, you can do: > > begin; > create table xyz... > alter table abc... > insert into abc select * from iii > update iii...; > drop table iii; > (oops, I messed up something) > rollback; But isn't that what it means to be "transactional"? Or am I spoiled by my "big, expensive enterprise database"? - -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA Is "common sense" really valid? For example, it is "common sense" to white-power racists that whites are superior to blacks, and that those with brown skins are mud people. However, that "common sense" is obviously wrong. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFEpUGPS9HxQb37XmcRAiJwAJ9/A/N/OgmslveSsX3Xym2QnDQz1gCghPD0 YX882Kv81hzZ4AKjaIVKHg8= =Gsml -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster