I realize that wasn't the question, but it does seem like a lot of trouble to get the equivalent of setAutoCommit(true);
On 9/17/07, Robert DiFalco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sure, but that wasn't really the question. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Dykman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, September 17, 2007 2:56 PM > To: Robert DiFalco > Cc: Baron Schwartz; mysql@lists.mysql.com > Subject: Re: Rollback on a Transaction with No Updates > > If your transaction are only 1 query deep, why use them at all? An > individual query is already atomic, regardless of table type/server > mode. > > - michael dkyman > > > On 9/17/07, Robert DiFalco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > While it is functionally equivalent I wonder if it the code paths > > taken are the same. I suppose for both commit and rollback mysql would > > > have to look for any pending work, if there were none both would do > nothing. > > That's what makes me think that there is probably no performance > > difference between the two. I ask this because my programmers like to > > do > > this: > > > > con = ... > > try > > { > > queryOnlyWith( con ); > > } > > finally > > { > > con.rollback(); > > } > > > > And I wanted to make sure that this would perform the same and act the > > > same as issuing a commit (unless there was an exception but I'm not > > analyzing that case). > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Baron Schwartz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Monday, September 17, 2007 2:36 PM > > To: Robert DiFalco > > Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com > > Subject: Re: Rollback on a Transaction with No Updates > > > > Robert DiFalco wrote: > > > Is there any difference between calling rollback or commit on a > > > transaction that did not alter data? For example, not a read-only > > > transaction but a transaction that only performed read-only selects. > > > Any difference in performance between calling rollback or commit? I > > > know they are functionally the same at the high level. > > > > The only thing I could think of was possibly rollback would leave open > > > transaction and its read view if you are running in REPEATABLE READ > > isolation mode, whereas commit begins a new transaction and discards > > the read view. But I just tested that, and both commands start a new > > transaction and discard the read view. > > > > That's a long way of saying they are functionally equivalent as far as > > > I know, as long as there are no changes to discard. > > > > Baron > > > > > > > > -- > > MySQL General Mailing List > > For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql > > To unsubscribe: > http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > -- > - michael dykman > - [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > - All models are wrong. Some models are useful. > > > -- - michael dykman - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - All models are wrong. Some models are useful. -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
