Does that mean what I did should have worked?
I'd want to know (i) the result of executing those cmds in a mysql
client, and (ii) what sqlresult & acountinfo contain after each cmd.
PB
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thank you for your response. I am using InnoDB (picked that out of the docs).
D
Thank you for your response. I am using InnoDB (picked that out of the docs).
Does that mean what I did should have worked? I should not have had 2 rows in
that table after running the commands?
Thanks again...
>I would like to wrap my updates top MySQL in transactions.
Use InnoDB tables.
I would like to wrap my updates top MySQL in transactions.
Use InnoDB tables.
PB
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I apologize if you saw this on the MySQL Forums but I have not gotten a
response... Thanks for your help...
I know this is probably a stupid question but I could use a nudge in the righ
> Sequences, if I got that right, need the new value to be stored
> immediately, i.e. outside of an active transaction. This requires a
> second connection to the database which probably causes more
> implementation work for my web application.
You mean real sequences? As with Oracle? Then no, yo
On 14.11.2007 12:50 CE(S)T, Martijn Tonies wrote:
> Yves,
>
> Did you read this reply I send earlier? I think it does what you
> want without needing to "lock" anything, thus making it portable.
>> I would suggest the following --
>>
>> create a table called "SEQUENCES":
Yes, I've read it and ac
Yves,
Did you read this reply I send earlier? I think it does what you
want without needing to "lock" anything, thus making it portable.
> > >> Damn, I found out that I need table locking *and* transactions.
> > >
> > > What makes you say that?
> >
> > BEGIN TRANSACTION
> > SELECT MAX(id) FROM ta
On Nov 13, 2007 3:32 PM, Yves Goergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I found the Oracle reference and it says that locks can never lock
> queries, so reading a table is possible in any case.
No, you just have to use FOR UPDATE and it will block.
- Perrin
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list arc
On 13.11.2007 20:43 CE(S)T, Baron Schwartz wrote:
> -- cxn 2
>
> set autocommit=0;
> begin;
> select * from t1;
> -- hangs
Delete my last message. I just did it again and now it works, too. I
have no idea what I did a couple of minutes ago, but it must have been
wrong.
Okay. Works, too. I was do
On 13.11.2007 20:57 CE(S)T, Baron Schwartz wrote:
> It will absolutely lock SELECTs. Are you sure autocommit is set to 0
> and you have an open transaction? Are you sure your table is InnoDB?
> I'm doing this right now:
>
> -- cxn 1
> mysql> set autocommit=0;
> mysql> begin;
> mysql> select *
On 13.11.2007 20:43 CE(S)T, Baron Schwartz wrote:
> Yves Goergen wrote:
>> I assume that at this point, any SELECT on the table I have locked
>> should block. But guess what, it doesn't. So it doesn't really lock.
>>
>
> What kind of lock are you using?
>
> -- cxn 1
>
> set autocommit=0;
> begin
Yves Goergen wrote:
On 13.11.2007 19:19 CE(S)T, Perrin Harkins wrote:
"You can use next-key locking to implement a uniqueness check in your
application: (...)
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/innodb-next-key-locking.html
This doesn't help my problem either. It may lock new INSERTs to the
On 13.11.2007 19:19 CE(S)T, Perrin Harkins wrote:
> "You can use next-key locking to implement a uniqueness check in your
> application: (...)
> http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/innodb-next-key-locking.html
This doesn't help my problem either. It may lock new INSERTs to the
table, but it won
Yves Goergen wrote:
On 13.11.2007 14:01 CE(S)T, Baron Schwartz wrote:
It's more complicated than that. You can use them together, you just
have to do it like this:
set autocommit = 0;
begin;
lock tables;
-- you are now in a transaction automatically begun by LOCK TABLES
.
I assume that
On 13.11.2007 14:01 CE(S)T, Baron Schwartz wrote:
> It's more complicated than that. You can use them together, you just
> have to do it like this:
>
> set autocommit = 0;
> begin;
> lock tables;
> -- you are now in a transaction automatically begun by LOCK TABLES
> .
I assume that at this
On Nov 13, 2007 11:39 AM, Baron Schwartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> InnoDB can also lock the gap, which will prevent new rows that would
> have been returned by the SELECT. The manual has more info on this in
> the section on consistent reads in InnoDB. FOR UPDATE will do what you
> need.
Inte
Yves Goergen wrote:
(Damn I hate those lists that don't come with a Reply-To to the list!
Resending...)
On 13.11.2007 17:39 CE(S)T, Baron Schwartz wrote:
Yves Goergen wrote:
Row level locking can only lock rows that exist. Creating new rows (that
would have an influence on my MAX value) are st
(Damn I hate those lists that don't come with a Reply-To to the list!
Resending...)
On 13.11.2007 17:39 CE(S)T, Baron Schwartz wrote:
> Yves Goergen wrote:
>> Row level locking can only lock rows that exist. Creating new rows (that
>> would have an influence on my MAX value) are still possible and
Yves Goergen wrote:
On 13.11.2007 16:37 CE(S)T, mark addison wrote:
As your using InnoDB, which has row level locking a SELECT ... FOR
UPDATE should work.
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/4.1/en/innodb-locking-reads.html
e.g.
BEGIN TRANSACTION
new_id := (SELECT MAX(id) FROM table FOR UPDATE) +
On 13.11.2007 14:01 CE(S)T, Baron Schwartz wrote:
> It's more complicated than that. You can use them together, you just
> have to do it like this:
>
> set autocommit = 0;
Is this the key that I have missed? I thought that setting autocommit =
0 is pointless when I issue statements within a tra
On 13.11.2007 16:37 CE(S)T, mark addison wrote:
> As your using InnoDB, which has row level locking a SELECT ... FOR
> UPDATE should work.
> http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/4.1/en/innodb-locking-reads.html
> e.g.
>
> BEGIN TRANSACTION
> new_id := (SELECT MAX(id) FROM table FOR UPDATE) + 1
> -- s
Baron Schwartz wrote:
Yves Goergen wrote:
(For the record... I missed the mailing list recipient - again!!)
On 13.11.2007 00:30 CE(S)T, Perrin Harkins wrote:
On Nov 12, 2007 5:58 PM, Yves Goergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
First I find a new id value, then I do several INSERTs that need to be
Yves,
> >> Damn, I found out that I need table locking *and* transactions.
> >
> > What makes you say that?
>
> BEGIN TRANSACTION
> SELECT MAX(id) FROM table
> INSERT INTO table (id) VALUES (?)
> INSERT INTO othertable (id) VALUES (?)
> COMMIT
>
> First I find a new id value, then I do several INS
On Nov 13, 2007 4:53 AM, Yves Goergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From that page:
> > Sometimes it would be useful to lock further tables in the course of
> > a transaction. Unfortunately, LOCK TABLES in MySQL performs an
> > implicit COMMIT and UNLOCK TABLES. An InnoDB variant of LOCK TABLES
> >
Yves Goergen wrote:
(For the record... I missed the mailing list recipient - again!!)
On 13.11.2007 00:30 CE(S)T, Perrin Harkins wrote:
On Nov 12, 2007 5:58 PM, Yves Goergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
First I find a new id value, then I do several INSERTs that need to be
atomic, and especially
(For the record... I missed the mailing list recipient - again!!)
On 13.11.2007 00:30 CE(S)T, Perrin Harkins wrote:
> On Nov 12, 2007 5:58 PM, Yves Goergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> First I find a new id value, then I do several INSERTs that need to be
>> atomic, and especially roll back compl
On 13.11.2007 01:04 CE(S)T, Perrin Harkins wrote:
> On Nov 12, 2007 6:47 PM, Yves Goergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> From what I've read about MySQL's table locks and InnoDB, you cannot use
>> LOCK TABLES with transactions. Either of them deactivates the other one.
>> Beginning a transaction unl
On Nov 12, 2007 5:58 PM, Yves Goergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> BEGIN TRANSACTION
> SELECT MAX(id) FROM table
> INSERT INTO table (id) VALUES (?)
> INSERT INTO othertable (id) VALUES (?)
> COMMIT
>
> First I find a new id value, then I do several INSERTs that need to be
> atomic, and especially
On 12.11.2007 23:31 CE(S)T, Perrin Harkins wrote:
> On Nov 12, 2007 5:24 PM, Yves Goergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Damn, I found out that I need table locking *and* transactions.
>
> What makes you say that?
BEGIN TRANSACTION
SELECT MAX(id) FROM table
INSERT INTO table (id) VALUES (?)
INSERT
On Nov 12, 2007 5:24 PM, Yves Goergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Damn, I found out that I need table locking *and* transactions.
What makes you say that?
> Maybe I'm really better off using a sequence (like the one PostgreSQL
> offers and like it is available as an add-on for Perl [1]).
That P
On 12.11.2007 22:16 CE(S)T, Yves Goergen wrote:
> Since I only need these locks for
> a very short time and a single table with no transaction support, this
> works fine for me.
Damn, I found out that I need table locking *and* transactions. I'm lost...
Maybe I'm really better off using a sequenc
On 12.11.2007 20:43 CE(S)T, Yves Goergen wrote:
> I'll have a look at those isolation levels though. Maybe it's what I'm
> looking for.
Not quite. But I'm going the LOCK TABLES way now. Locking a single table
exclusively for those rare moments seems to be the best solution.
I could also implement
On Nov 12, 2007 2:43 PM, Yves Goergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> SELECT COUNT(*) FROM table WHERE name = ?
> -- a short delay which is long enough for a concurrent request :(
> UPDATE table SET name = ? WHERE id = ?
I think that even with SERIALIZABLE isolation level, this won't lock
anything if
Okay, I feel like I need to clarify some things.
I do have a UNIQUE INDEX constraint on those columns, so the other user
won't actually write the same value another time, but it will fail at a
level which it should not.
I don't want to use AUTO_INCREMENT because it's not portable. My
application
On Nov 12, 2007 1:25 PM, Yves Goergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> When I start a transaction, then find the maximum value of a column and
> use that + 1 to write a new row into the table, how do transactions
> protect me from somebody else doing the same thing so that we'd both end
> up writing a
Hello Yves,
> there's very much information about how transactions and locking works
> in InnoDB, but maybe there's also a simple and understandable answer to
> my simple question:
>
> When I start a transaction, then find the maximum value of a column and
> use that + 1 to write a new row into th
Hi,
All locking in *MySQL* is deadlock-free. This is managed by always
requesting all needed locks at once at the beginning of a query and always
locking the tables in the same order.
The --external-locking and --skip-external-locking options explicitly enable
and disable external locking.
Th
It only works with engines that support transactions like innodb and
solid, i strongly sugget to read these links from the manual.
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/ansi-diff-transactions.html
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/innodb-transaction-model.html
Carlos
On 9/25/06, [EMAIL
Chris W. Parker wrote:
Hello,
Me again. Excuse for sending two questions so closely together.
I'm looking through the MySQL manual (as well as searching Google and
the PHP site's MySQL functions) trying to find out how to test an Insert
statement (or any other statement for that matter).
Altho
I think it might have something to do with the fact that I'm running the
NDB engine. I'm not sure... It doesn't seem to have the same problem
on Inno (another transaction-safe engine)
I think I need to send MySQL some info so they can try to duplicate it.
I'm wondering if anyone else runni
This should be working.
You can respond directly to me with schema and SQL that you are using and I
can try to reproduce in-house.
Thanks,
Jonathan Miller
Austin, Texas USA
Senior Quality Assurance Developer
MySQL AB www.mysql.com
__ ___ ___ __
/ |/ /_ __/ __/ __ \/ /
/ /
Hi Cory - nice to see a fellow Lasso user here!
I've not use transactions myself but I think you might be having a problem with
autocommit.
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/commit.html
HTH,
James Harvard
At 12:44 am -0700 15/12/05, Cory @ SkyVantage wrote:
>I have a transaction that is ve
Hello.
See:
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/mysql/en/transaction.html
liofr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi
> i use a sofware to connect to mysql and it can connect with succes but
> wanted to share acces to mysql to many poeple and it popup
> [MUSQL][ODBC 3.51 Driver] Transaction are not
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
C.F. Scheidecker Antunes wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Can anyone tell me what to do in order to use transactions on a java
> application? Is there any howto regarding this issu?
>
> Thanks,
>
> C.F.
>
C.F.
First, make sure you're using the InnoDB storage
Egor,
Thank you , I wasn't sure anyone would ever respond to
this post :)
What I wound up doing is , from the application level,
running an if / else. The if checks to see if each
$query has succeeded. If any of them failed, I do a
rollback. If they all have succeeded, I then do a
committ.
No
Stuart Felenstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have a slight dilemma. I am using transactions to
> insert data into multiple tables. All but one table
> is Innodb. That one is Myisam and it's left as such
> because its one text column, so I want the benefits of
> full text search.
>
> Still
Thank you Osvaldo, That is what I was thinking.
Sometimes when you try to learn from example or manual
it's a bit unclear because they generally show a
"simple" transaction (1 insert into 1 table)
Stuart
--- Osvaldo Sommer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You have a problem, what if the first insert
You have a problem, what if the first insert give a error, then you
don't know. You have to check each statement for error and if no error
if found in all the statements then issue a commit if not a rollback
Osvaldo Sommer
-Original Message-
From: Stuart Felenstein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTE
Sorry I found out about Last Insert_ID right after
writing this. I guess the correct sequence is
check manual then post to list ?
Stuart
--- Stuart Felenstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm in the midst of writing out some code that will
> take data from a huge form and write it to the
> dat
on 7/22/04 3:54 PM, Justin Swanhart at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> MySQL doesn't guarantee that there will be no gaps in sequence values.
> Assigment of the id is always atomic because innodb uses an AUTO_INC
> lock that lasts for the time of the insert, not the life of the
> transaction.
>
> let
MySQL doesn't guarantee that there will be no gaps in sequence values.
Assigment of the id is always atomic because innodb uses an AUTO_INC
lock that lasts for the time of the insert, not the life of the
transaction.
lets say your highest order number is 10
transaction begins for client 1
inse
hi there,
i'm using two different database objects, for each connection.
i still haven't tried with save points, but i will, to see what append.
regards,
andré
Citando Heikki Tuuri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Andre,
>
> - Original Message -
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Newsgroups: mailing.d
Andre,
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: mailing.database.myodbc
Sent: Sunday, March 07, 2004 3:28 PM
Subject: transactions
> Hello there.
>
> i'm working with transactions, and i have one situtation where i start a
> transaction and execute the insert/update st
Bill,
http://www.innodb.com/ibman.php#Implicit_commit:
"
8.7 When does MySQL implicitly commit or rollback a transaction?
MySQL has the autocommit mode switched on in a session if you do not do SET
AUTOCOMMIT=0. In the autocommit mode MySQL does a commit after each SQL
statement, if that statemen
Try Microsoft's "Inside SQL Server 2000" by Delaney.
-Original Message-
From: Thomas Svenson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 15 August 2003 01:44
To: MySQL list
Subject: Transactions tutorial
I'm looking for any online resources/tutorials and such about transactions.
Preferable for MySQL
Thank you for pointing that out Kaarel you saved me some time.
I wonder, Patric, if you ever read the source code of the OS you are
developing for or if you ever read the source of the compilers you use
because it is most likely that there are bugs and following your
argumentation: "a feature is
I'm reticent to consume any more of this lists bandwidth and trust this will
end the thread, but here is my point. There are many 'gotchas' to consider
when developing an application that uses any dynamic file structure from
simple flat ascii
files to engorged dbms's. Add multi-user and multi-tas
; A robust file handler or dbdbmss a wonderful tool
> but it is only a tool and
> does not relieve a programmer of their
> responsibility. That's my point.
>
> Pat...
>
> BTW MyMySQLs one of the best SQSQLervers out there,
> and our SQSQLerver of
> choice.
>
>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Dan Nelson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "mysqllist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2003 11:11 PM
Subject: Re: Transactions
>
> Good point. However, I disagree with you on
> fundemental points. Subsystems within an app
Have you considered writing your own DBMS as well?
-Original Message-
From: Patrick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 29 July 2003 23:03
To: Dan Nelson
Cc: mysqllist
Subject: Re: Transactions
Well said Dan. While foreign keys, cascades and built-in transactions are
convenient, atomicity
At 13:08 -0700 7/29/03, b b wrote:
Most web hosting companies run the mysql standard.
Which means one can't run transactions. If that is the
Depends. As of MySQL 4, InnoDB (which provides transactional
tables) is included by default.
case, then how do you handle many to many
relationships with tr
Good point. However, I disagree with you on
fundemental points. Subsystems within an application
should remain indepedant for a easier maintanance and
better software development process.
Here we have a multi tiered system whereby the
database can't guarantee it's integrity without good
client
ot; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "mysqllist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2003 4:59 PM
Subject: Re: Transactions
> In the last episode (Jul 29), b b said:
> > Most web hosting companies run the mysql standard. Which means one
> > can't run transa
In the last episode (Jul 29), b b said:
> Most web hosting companies run the mysql standard. Which means one
> can't run transactions. If that is the case, then how do you handle
> many to many relationships with truely normalized manner without
> risking data corruption
>
> For example: You have
In http://www.mysql.com/doc/en/News-4.0.6.html
* mysql_change_user() will now reset the connection to the state of a
fresh connect (Ie, ROLLBACK any active transaction, close all temporary
tables, reset all user variables etc..)
So it is in there, starting with version MySQL 4.0.6.
-steve-
-
> If you're using a non-persistent connection, PHP will close the
> connection when the script terminates, and the MySQL server will roll
back
> implicitly. For a non-persistent connection, the connection remains
open
> and you may not see the rollback behavior your expect.
I thought this was fi
On 18-Jun-2003 Becoming Digital wrote:
...
>> if(!mysql_query($array[$i])) {
>> $flag = false;
>>break;
>> }
>>
>> after the loop I do
>> if($flag)
>> mysql_query("commit");
>> else
>> mysql_query("rollback");
>
> Be careful with that last if() statement. I would either change the
>
rom: "Jonas Geiregat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, 17 June, 2003 15:19
Subject: Re: transactions with php
Becoming Digital wrote:
> I found one item in the PHP Classes Repository that may be of use.
> Unfortunately, the comments are in Span
Becoming Digital wrote:
I found one item in the PHP Classes Repository that may be of use.
Unfortunately, the comments are in Spanish, so it's up to you to
figure out the
code.
http://promoxy.mirrors.phpclasses.org/browse.html/file/3077.html
Edward Dudlik
Becoming Digital
www.becomingdigital.com
Becoming Digital wrote:
I found one item in the PHP Classes Repository that may be of use.
Unfortunately, the comments are in Spanish, so it's up to you to figure out the
code.
http://promoxy.mirrors.phpclasses.org/browse.html/file/3077.html
Edward Dudlik
Becoming Digital
www.becomingdigital.com
-
I found one item in the PHP Classes Repository that may be of use.
Unfortunately, the comments are in Spanish, so it's up to you to figure out the
code.
http://promoxy.mirrors.phpclasses.org/browse.html/file/3077.html
Edward Dudlik
Becoming Digital
www.becomingdigital.com
- Original Message
At 10:44 -0700 6/17/03, Jonas Geiregat wrote:
I'm trying to implement transaction (mysql) in my php code. Could
anyone tell me if this is a good way of using them. I make an array
with all the query's I loop through them. like this
mysql_query($qarray[$i])or die($flag = false);. After the loop I
Hi.
On Sun 2003-03-09 at 11:34:33 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> From what I understand, "transactions" are a kind of protection that
> prevents certain commands from executing if certain other conditions
> haven't been met.
Not completely. They can do much more.
Another way to look at tran
From: Dana Diederich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 09:40:45 -0500
Perhaps the InnoDB/MyISAM gurus can comment on this. I want to switch from
MyISAM to Innodb, because we have database tables that have many updates,
inserts, deletes and selects going on at the same tim
l DuBois [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 10:26 AM
> To: Dana Diederich; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: transactions...
>
> At 9:40 -0500 9/23/02, Dana Diederich wrote:
> >Perhaps the InnoDB/MyISAM gurus can comment on this. I want to switch
&
At 9:40 -0500 9/23/02, Dana Diederich wrote:
>Perhaps the InnoDB/MyISAM gurus can comment on this. I want to switch from
>MyISAM to Innodb, because we have database tables that have many updates,
>inserts, deletes and selects going on at the same time. My belief is that
>InnoDB's better locking
all speed.
Cheers.
-Dana
> -Original Message-
> From: Thomas Seifert [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 2:14 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: transactions...
>
> On Mon, 23 Sep 2002 08:40:59 +0300 (EEST) Iikka Meriläinen
>
On Mon, 23 Sep 2002 08:40:59 +0300 (EEST) Iikka Meriläinen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Sep 2002, Daniel Kiss wrote:
>
> > Hi!
> >
> > At 00:56 2002.09.23._ -0300, you wrote:
> > >Do I loose
> > >too much performance using InnoDB tables in autocommit mode instead of
> > >using MyISAM
On Mon, 23 Sep 2002, Daniel Kiss wrote:
> Hi!
>
> At 00:56 2002.09.23._ -0300, you wrote:
> >Do I loose
> >too much performance using InnoDB tables in autocommit mode instead of
> >using MyISAM tables?
>
> The real quiestion is: Why do you want to use InnoDB tables when you don't
> want to use it
Hi!
At 00:56 2002.09.23._ -0300, you wrote:
>Do I loose
>too much performance using InnoDB tables in autocommit mode instead of
>using MyISAM tables?
The real quiestion is: Why do you want to use InnoDB tables when you don't
want to use its transaction safe features?
Anyway yes. I'm sure it is
Joao,
> I think I've already asked this before, but I will try again. Do I loose
> too much performance using InnoDB tables in autocommit mode instead of
> using MyISAM tables?
Possibly, but "too much" is really relative on what your needs are. What
are you trying to achieve and what is more im
Anyone know of an email marketing software suite that works well with MySQL
on the
backend?
I've seen stuff that works with ODBC db connectivity but I'm not interested
in moving to MS SQL or Access.
Any feedback is appreciated
Thanks
Mark
-
, 2002 9:33 PM
To: Bob Boden
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Transactions not supported by database - Perl
Send the set autocommit=0 just as you send any other query in perl.
Bob Boden wrote:
>Attempts to disable auto-commit mode in Perl using the DBI command
>$dbh->{AutoCommit} = 0; re
Send the set autocommit=0 just as you send any other query in perl.
Bob Boden wrote:
>Attempts to disable auto-commit mode in Perl using the DBI command
>$dbh->{AutoCommit} = 0; returns the following message, "Transactions not
>supported by database".
>
>I am using the latest version of MySQL-
First question: did you set autocommit=0?
--Walt Weaver
Bozeman, Montana
-Original Message-
From: a a [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 9:27 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: transactions on MySQL (innoDB)
Hello
I can't create innoDB tables in db MySQL to do
please let us know the SQL query you are trying, and a DESCRIBE TABLENAME so we can
see how your table(s) are laid out. also, please tell us what you actually changed
in your my.cnf file
by the way, before you can do transactions, you must set the AUTOCOMMIT variable to
0
-Ryan Hatch
a a wrot
access,
etc. v/s ISAM ?
Thanks,
John
PT FirstWAP,
Jakarta, Indonesia
- Original Message -
From: "Don Read" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Simon Green" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Pete Kuczynski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Mo
John,
Thursday, May 02, 2002, 3:17:59 PM, you wrote:
JN> I would greately appreciate if someone could advise me on which version of
JN> MySQL supports transactions ?
Transaction is supported with transaction-safe tables (InnoDB, BDB).
http://www.mysql.com/doc/T/a/Table_types.html
JN>
maxim,
Wednesday, April 10, 2002, 1:27:30 PM, you wrote:
m> i've just started work with MySQL. Does anybody know how can i
m> use transaction with MySQL? Is this capability supported?
m> I write web-shop... Sory my eng is bed...
Yes, MySQL supports transactions on the transaction-safe tables
(In
On Wed, 10 Apr 2002, maxim wrote:
> Hello ,
> i've just started work with MySQL. Does anybody know how can i
> use transaction with MySQL? Is this capability supported?
> I write web-shop... Sory my eng is bed...
Maxim,
MySQL supports different table types. Some of them (BDB and InnoDB)
support
On Wed, 10 Apr 2002 13:27:30 +0300
maxim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello ,
>
>
>
> i've just started work with MySQL. Does anybody know how can i
> use transaction with MySQL? Is this capability supported?
> I write web-shop... Sory my eng is bed...
>
what term do you mean with "transactio
no stored procedures yet. maybe vers 4.1
-Original Message-
From: Kevin D [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 12:59 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: transactions, referntial integrity
I've been reading the docs but I just want to verify. It seems like the
latest
On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 01:58:55PM -0500, Kevin D wrote:
> I've been reading the docs but I just want to verify. It seems like
> the latest version of MySQL support transactions and referential
> integrity. Is this correct? Does MySQL now also support stored
> procedures?
BDB and InnoDB tables b
it stable?
> Thanks again.
> with regards,
> chandrashekhar
> - Original Message -
> From: "Jeremy Zawodny" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Chandrashekhar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 12:0
EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 12:01 PM
Subject: Re: transactions support in mysql
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2001 at 11:40:15AM +0530, Chandrashekhar wrote:
>
> > Are transactions supported in mysql.Please guide me.
>
> They are. Se
On Wed, Jul 18, 2001 at 11:40:15AM +0530, Chandrashekhar wrote:
> Are transactions supported in mysql.Please guide me.
They are. See the manual:
http://www.mysql.com/doc/
Jeremy
--
Jeremy D. Zawodny, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Technical Yahoo - Yahoo Finance
Desk: (408) 349-7878 Fax: (408) 349-
Hi!
> "Pete" == Pete Kuczynski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Pete> Thanks Monty!
Pete> will this work on NT as well? or do I need to move to Linux.
Yes; We have MySQL-Max for both NT and Linux.
Pete> I don't much care if the tables are BDB or InnoDB, just that I have
Pete> transaction supp
Pete Kuczynski writes:
> Thanks Monty!
>
> will this work on NT as well? or do I need to move to Linux.
>
> I don't much care if the tables are BDB or InnoDB, just that I have
> transaction support.
>
> Good luch with the Nusphere thing!
>
> Pete
>
>
> --
> _
Thanks Monty!
will this work on NT as well? or do I need to move to Linux.
I don't much care if the tables are BDB or InnoDB, just that I have
transaction support.
Good luch with the Nusphere thing!
Pete
Michael Widenius wrote:
>
> hi!
>
> > "Pete" == Pete Kuczynski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
hi!
> "Pete" == Pete Kuczynski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Pete> Hi,
Pete> I updated my tables to BDB, but it still shows MYISAM.
Pete> Do I need to remove mysql and reinstall it compiled for BDB like the
Pete> manual suggests? I'm using nusphere's mysql on NT4 server, so I'm not
Pete> shur
> From: Pete Kuczynski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> Can anyone tell me for shure if my version of mysql supports
> transactions. Version: 3.23.37
>
> The bitbybit web site states that is does not, but someone told me that
> it does, help!
>
> > MySQL doesn't support transactions. If you don't k
1 - 100 of 126 matches
Mail list logo
