Comments on: Understanding Drizzle’s Transaction Log

By: Eric Day

Eric Day — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 21:18:45 +0000

Awesome post, great demo of all new features.

By: Eric Day

Eric Day — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 20:18:00 +0000

Awesome post, great demo of all new features.

By: jobinau

jobinau — Mon, 22 Mar 2010 07:05:59 +0000

IMHO, Redundant info is an evil. it can lead to inconsistencies.
Oracle is a good example of how messed up with redundant info here and there.
Intern giving me a Job

By: Jay Pipes

Jay Pipes — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 16:43:39 +0000

Interesting idea, Ronald. How would the columns in the view be structured? Would you want a CONTAINS_DDL boolean column in the TRANSACTION_LOG_TRANSACTIONS view? Or something different?

By: ronaldbradford

ronaldbradford — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 05:49:41 +0000

I think from a DBA and auditing perspective it may be good for TRANSACTION_LOG_TRANSACTIONS to include if not a count, an indicator of DDL v DML that occured. I could see the benefit of a UDF to display all DDL transactions via knowing which transactions to inspect.

By: Jay Pipes: Understanding Drizzle’s Transaction Log | Weez.com

Jay Pipes: Understanding Drizzle’s Transaction Log | Weez.com — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 20:09:29 +0000

[...] View full post on Planet Drizzle [...]

By: Jay Pipes

Jay Pipes — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 19:45:21 +0000

Right now, the transaction log's file size limit is, of course, dependent on the operating system. In the future, I'm developing a way to archive/snapshot the transaction log which should alleviate file size issues.

Cheers!

Jay

By: Jay Pipes

Jay Pipes — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 19:44:17 +0000

Sure, I can make that happen

By: jobinau

jobinau — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 11:15:32 +0000

Keeping DDL in this way is good. appreciating the idea behind it.
Anybody is free to do transformation to any system.

as a user, do i have a say on the transaction.log file size?
once it is full what will happen?

By: Baron

Baron — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 00:34:22 +0000

Checksumming should be enabled by default IMO.