Skip site navigation (1)
Skip section navigation (2)
Peripheral Links
Header And Logo
|
Site Navigation
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: Fri, 25 May 2007 00:26:27 +0200
- Message-id: <f353ej$m1m$1(at)sea(dot)gmane(dot)org>
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
- References:
- why postgresql over other RDBMS
- From: Jasbinder Singh Bali
- Re: why postgresql over other RDBMS
- From: Tom Allison
- Re: why postgresql over other RDBMS
- From: Richard Huxton
- Re: why postgresql over other RDBMS
- From: Alexander Staubo
- why postgresql over other RDBMS
- Prev by Date: Re: Return rows from function with expressions
- Next by Date: Re: why postgresql over other RDBMS
- Previous by thread: Re: why postgresql over other RDBMS
- Next by thread: Re: why postgresql over other RDBMS
- Indexes: