Re: undefined behaviour for sub-transactions?

On 11/15/05, Tyler MacDonald <[email protected]> wrote:

> It says,
>
>            Enable transactions (by turning "AutoCommit" off) until the next
>            call to "commit" or "rollback". After the next "commit" or "roll-
>            back", "AutoCommit" will automatically be turned on again.
>            If "AutoCommit" is already off when "begin_work" is called then it
>            does nothing except return an error. If the driver does not support
>            transactions then when "begin_work" attempts to set "AutoCommit"
>            off the driver will trigger a fatal error.

Ok, let's quote. :-) Here's an excerpt from the AutoCommit flags
documentation. It's a paragraph from the section on "Databases in
which a transaction must be explicitly
started":

           To do this, the driver will automatically begin an explicit trans-
           action when "AutoCommit" is turned off, or after a "commit" or
           "rollback" (or when the application issues the next database opera-
           tion after one of those events).

           In this way, the application does not have to treat these databases
           as a special case.

In other words, the rationale is *not* using begin_work, but simply
setting AutoCommit to off. I always found this to work as expected and
sufficiently portable.


Jochen

--
Often it does seem a pity that Noah and his party did not miss the
boat. (Mark Twain)

-- 
MySQL Perl Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/perl
To unsubscribe:    http://lists.mysql.com/[email protected]