Kenneth: Thanks, I see your point, but that was just an example, put an "insert" or "delete" command instead of the "create table", and that row would be "inserted" or "deleted" without executing a rollback due to the SQL error. I haven't tested though. But perhaps, as you said, the create table makes its own transaction, but that shouldn't bother the rest of statements included in the explicit "outer transaction". Should it?
I might be missing something but any number of statements surrounded by a begin/commit should all be done or undone. ----- Original Message ----- From: "kenneth long" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Miguel_Angel_Latorre_Díaz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 25, 2004 7:31 PM Subject: Re: [sqlite] Bug or it makes sense? > Miguel, > > I suspect that similar to most SQL languages the > "Create" statements are their own transactions and > perform an automatic commit.. Thats the way Oracle > performs as do many others. > > > > --- Miguel_Angel_Latorre_Díaz > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Ok. But if one just does (also tried with the .read > > metacommand): > > sqlite3_exec (db, "begin; create table foo (value1 > > integer, value2 integer); > > just an error; commit;", rest of params...) > > > > should it do the same? > > To me, the "begin; ..." is a whole multi statement > > which should be done > > whitin a transaction because of the "begin". So, all > > or nothing, but I get a > > mixture. > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
