Re: Why Oracle does not allow rollback of DDL statements?
From: Thomas Kellerer <YQDHXVLMUBXG_at_spammotel.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 13:42:31 +0100
Message-ID: <6nqohnFbdhaU1@mid.individual.net>
>
> So, you are suggesting that Oracle RDBMS should learn from the RDBMS that
> has failed and vanished from the market?
Well Oracle _made_ it vanish from the market to begin with.
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 13:42:31 +0100
Message-ID: <6nqohnFbdhaU1@mid.individual.net>
Mladen Gogala, 10.11.2008 13:05:
>> Other RDBMS can handle that. rdb/VMS was able to handle things like that >> 15 years ago. Oracle should have a look at the source code as they now >> own that product :) >> >> Thomas
>
> So, you are suggesting that Oracle RDBMS should learn from the RDBMS that
> has failed and vanished from the market?
Well Oracle _made_ it vanish from the market to begin with.
Only because something is old, doesn't mean that it didn't have good features. I think rdb had data partitioning built in (e.g by index) long before Oracle was even thinking about it.
> Why would they do that? To look more like SQL Server?
That has nothing to do with making it look like SQL Server. I'm definitely not a fan of SQL Server (in fact I hate it) but I like transactional DDL and SQL Server isn't the only one to have this.
Postgres and DB2 have that as well.
Thomas Received on Mon Nov 10 2008 - 06:42:31 CST