Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] drop/rename table and transactions

On Fri, 26 Nov 1999, Mike Mascari wrote:
> The DCOM remark was just a joke ;-). My remark concerning ORACLE was in
> response to Andreas' comment that implicit COMMITs of DDL statements was
> absurd. I wanted to simply point out that, since ORACLE has 70% market
> share,

I did not see the response to Andreas, nor did I see Andreas' assertion that it
was absurd.  My apologies.

> counterparts and to be able to "undo" filesystem operations. That, it seems
> to
> me, will be a major undertaking and not going to happen any time soon...

Yes, that is true.  As long as the storage manager relies on the filesystem for
table names, this will be a problem, unless filesystem deletions are delayed
until COMMIT, and filesystem creates are undone at a ROLLBACK.

--
Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio
1 Peter 4:11