Marc L. Allen <mlal...@outsitenetworks.com> wrote: > I see. So, the implied commit doesn't occur until you finalize?
Or reset. > As a result, the subsequent update in step 5 was added to his > non-finalized select? The update was attempted within the same transaction. > Still.. what is the correct way to handle the explicit scenario? I mean, > having one process do a BEGIN SELECT UPDATE and another > do BEGIN UPDATE is perfectly reasonable, isn't it? How do you protect from a > problem? Detect the error, rollback, and try > again? That's one way. The other is for the first connection to start its transaction with BEGIN IMMEDIATE, thus marking itself as a writer from the start. -- Igor Tandetnik _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
