On Fri, Oct 04, 2002 at 10:06:38AM -0600, scott.marlowe wrote:
> Which reminds me, when Oracle was responding to the .org using postgresql
> issue they said that Postgresql doesn't support transactions. Did they
> even bother looking at the docs for Postgresql before spewing their lame
> crap??? Probably not.
To be fair, in the Oracle posting, they actually said PostgreSQL
lacked the "transactional features" of "any commercial enterprise
database". While that is presumably something beyond just
"transactions", I was completely unclear about what it was supposed
actually to be. Anyone got any ideas?
A
--
----
Andrew Sullivan 204-4141 Yonge Street
Liberty RMS Toronto, Ontario Canada
<andrew@libertyrms.info> M2P 2A8
+1 416 646 3304 x110