Horton

Re: [HACKERS] DROP TABLE inside a transaction block

Philip Warner <pjw@rhyme.com.au>

View thread
From: Philip Warner <pjw@rhyme.com.au>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Lamar Owen <lamar.owen@wgcr.org>, Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>, Mike Mascari <mascarm@mascari.com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>, Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii@sra.co.jp>, pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org
Date: 2000-03-08T07:10:04Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
At 01:54 8/03/00 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>Philip Warner <pjw@rhyme.com.au> writes:
>> For the ignorant, are you able to explain why naming files
>> '<table_name>_<IOD>' is not acceptable? This seems to satisfy both
>> requirements (and seemed to be the conclusion of the previous discussion).
>
>Well, it's pretty simple: consider what has to happen to make RENAME
>TABLE be rollback-able.
...etc

Sorry for the stupid question. I was confusing the previous discussions
over 'DROP COLUMN' with this one, without actually engaging my brain. 

Your response was admirably patient.

FWIW, without a 'storage area' or 'table space' concept, I agree that table
names based on OID's are TWTG.


----------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Warner                    |     __---_____
Albatross Consulting Pty. Ltd.   |----/       -  \
(A.C.N. 008 659 498)             |          /(@)   ______---_
Tel: +61-03-5367 7422            |                 _________  \
Fax: +61-03-5367 7430            |                 ___________ |
Http://www.rhyme.com.au          |                /           \|
                                 |    --________--
PGP key available upon request,  |  /
and from pgp5.ai.mit.edu:11371   |/