
> How about:
> 
> 1. alter_rename_table = no
> 
> The syntax in PostgreSQL is ALTER TABLE x RENAME TO y;

Other db's seem to use "rename {table|index|view|database} a to b"

> 
> 2. atomic_updates = no
> 
> Huh? Besides being paranoid about fsync()'ing transactions how is
> a transaction based MVCC not atomic with respect to updates?
> 
> 3. automatic_rowid = no
> 
> The description simply says Automatic rowid. Does this apply to
> query result sets or to the underlying relation? If the latter,
> PostgreSQL has, of course, an OID for every tuple in the
> database.

I think they mean our ctid. When hiroshi implemented it I suggested 
using the keyword "rowid" for ctid access. Imho it is what people are 
looking for when using rowid. There was no comment.

> I'm starting to get very tired of this. I don't see why
> PostgreSQL users are obligated to get MySQL tests correct. And
> I'm only 15% through the list...
> 
> Bottom line...either the test writers are ignorant or deceptive.
> Either way I won't trust my data with them...

Is this necessary? imho we are talking with someone who tries to 
correct things for us.

Andreas

Wed, 24 May 2000 16:42:34 +0200
Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA@wien.spardat.at>
AW: Performance (was: The New Slashdot Setup (includes MySql server))