Re: Oracle transactions and DDL statements.

From: <peter.koch.larsen_at_gmail.com>
Date: 10 May 2006 15:02:36 -0700
Message-ID: <1147298556.214150.7810@q12g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>

DA Morgan skrev:

> peter.koch.larsen_at_gmail.com wrote:
> > DA Morgan skrev:
> >

[snip]
> >>>> --
> >>>> Sybrand Bakker, Senior Oracle DBA
> >> Actually Peter my instinct here is to agree with Sybrand. Everything
> >> you've written flies in the face of good practice in an Oracle database.
> >
> > If I were to develop a new application, naturally I would take the
> > idiosyncracies of the target platform into consideration.. Instead I am
> > porting an existing one that runs on a wide range of platforms -
> > including several databases of which I've already mentioned a few.
> > This should be evident had you read the first post on this thread.
> >
> > /Peter

>

> It is evident. It should be evident to you from my response and those of
> others that have be involved in this thread that we are all consider
> your products design, at least as you have presented it, as far from
> being best practice.

Right. Certainly you have been reading between the lines, making dead wrong assumptions about our software.

> And, further, that Oracle will not change its
> concepts and architecture to make what you are trying to do work as you
> seemingly wish.

I never had that in mind. I just hoped that Oracle had grown up and enabled some "a transaction really is a transaction" somewhere in its product, but it obviously has not.

>

> If you want to work with Oracle. And you want to engage in best
> practices rather than using duct tape you will need to re-examine the
> underlying design decisions.

I see you are an employee of the University of Washington. I've had a brief look at your Universitys homepage and see that there is a Database group there (interesting research, some of it that i will look into later).
I will recommend that you have a talk with one of the people from that group (I assume you are not part of it) and ask one from the staff there for a motivation to have a transaction that contains DDL-statements not to be a transaction (at least it violates at least one of the ACID rules). You will find there is none - except perhaps for a pragmatic "it is to difficult to implement" or "it is historically so" argument. (Those arguments will come from Oracle, of course).

Kind regards
Peter

> --
> Daniel A. Morgan
> University of Washington
> damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
> (replace x with u to respond)
> Puget Sound Oracle Users Group
> www.psoug.org
Received on Wed May 10 2006 - 17:02:36 CDT