On Wednesday 09 November 2005 09:14, Will Senn wrote: > Total and complete insanity on the vendors part, but a truthful > assessment nonetheless. Gone are the days of bullet proof specs, or are > they? Could it be that they were never here? Sadly not, although it may > have seemed so, back in the day. The exponential increase in complexity > has exposed a great number of flaws in what might have seemed solid back > when. > You really don't want to get in to the discussion of bullet proof specs. ;-)
> However, that being said, my 2 cents is that it's totally nuts to commit > anything after an error, unless you don't care that your datastore is in > an unknown state (you being the database vendor). The argument that the > app developer might want it that way... sheesh harkens back to the days > of writing linear incongruent pseudo random number generators using > BASIC's integer overflow characteristics... Cool, but infinitely > frightening (non-portable, monster-unmaintainable) at the same time. > > -Will I don't think that anyone is suggesting that. In further thought of my suggestion, I guess the database vendors would have to do some work. Considering what I am thinking would force them to rethink what is meant by a connection relative to a transaction, and how to allow for multiple non-nested concurrent transactions to occur within the same connection context. But again, I don't think that its going to be rocket science. -- Michael Segel Principal MSCC
