Re: all about transaction
From: Hugo Kornelis (hugo_at_pe_NO_rFact.in_SPAM_fo)
Date: 12/14/04
- Next message: mark baekdal: "Re: Maintaining db changes"
- Previous message: mark baekdal: "Re: Maintaining db changes"
- In reply to: Deepson Thomas: "Re: all about transaction"
- Next in thread: Deepson Thomas: "Re: all about transaction"
- Reply: Deepson Thomas: "Re: all about transaction"
- Reply: Steve Kass: "Re: all about transaction"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 12:13:25 +0100
On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 02:09:03 -0800, Deepson Thomas wrote:
>Hi Hugo thanks once again ... i got the words chained and unchained from
>sybase sqlserver ref...
(snip)
Hi Deepson,
Well, Sybase is not SQL Server, though they do have the same ancestry.
Based on your explanation of chained and unchaiend transactions in Sybase,
I think that the only thing that is roughly comparable in SQL Server is
the SET IMPLICIT_TRANSACTIONS [ON | OFF] command.
With this setting on, most SQL statements (see Books Online for the full
list) will automatically begin a transaction if one isn't active. This
transaction will remain open until explicitly committed or rolled back or
until an error condition occurs that implicitly rolls back the open
transaction.
With the implicit transaction setting off, transactions will only be
started when an explicit BEGIN TRANSACTION is executed. Statements that
are not enclosed in a transaction will still be executed as ATOMIC
operations (as if the statement itself was enclosed between BEGIN TRAN and
COMMIT TRAN).
Best, Hugo
-- (Remove _NO_ and _SPAM_ to get my e-mail address)
- Next message: mark baekdal: "Re: Maintaining db changes"
- Previous message: mark baekdal: "Re: Maintaining db changes"
- In reply to: Deepson Thomas: "Re: all about transaction"
- Next in thread: Deepson Thomas: "Re: all about transaction"
- Reply: Deepson Thomas: "Re: all about transaction"
- Reply: Steve Kass: "Re: all about transaction"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
