Pavel Ivanov <paiva...@gmail.com> wrote: > There's another way how it could make sense - if you read that excerpt > in context. ;-) The "statement-level read consistency" definition > cited by Petite is the transaction isolation level. I.e. it defines > what each statement executed in one transaction can see related to the > changes done in another transaction.
Well, in this case, if you only ever execute one statement per transaction in SQLite, then it does support "statement-level read consistency." Though I fail to see how it materially differs from "serializable". Am I missing something obvious? > This isolation level doesn't > define visibility of changes done in the same transaction. These > visibility rules are defined in different place in the documentation > and don't depend on transaction isolation level. > > So returning to my example "statement-level read consistency" means > that cursor can see myfield=2 if update is done in another transaction > before cursor is opened but after begin is executed. Wait a minute. If "statement-level read consistency" only applies to two queries in different transactions, what bearing, if any, does it have on your example of "open, fetch, update, fetch"? There, everything happens in the same transaction. I'm thoroughly confused. -- Igor Tandetnik _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
