I am very much a self taught sql programmer, and I only use it for a
few small projects at home. Work requires just a bit of db work on my
part, there are others who do the heavy lifting :-)
I was surprised when one of my heavy lifting co-workers told me that
when a transaction is begun, if the client disconnects (program bug,
computer crash, whatever) without doing an explicit commit or
rollback, the default in both Oracle and Sybase, and probably in every
SQL database, is to commit. This seems completely backwards to me.
For instance, the example from Practical SQL Handbok of transferring
money from one account to another, you sure don't want any changes at
all if the client disconnects after having subtracted money from one
account but before having added that same amount to the second
account.
Could someone enlighten me here? He seemed absolutely positive that
a disconnect is as good as a commit and always has been.
--
... _._. ._ ._. . _._. ._. ___ .__ ._. . .__. ._ .. ._.
Felix Finch: scarecrow repairman & rocket surgeon / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG = E987 4493 C860 246C 3B1E 6477 7838 76E9 182E 8151 ITAR license #4933
I've found a solution to Fermat's Last Theorem but I see I've run out of room o
