On Jun 21, 2014, at 1:36 PM, Simon Slavin <slav...@bigfraud.org> wrote: > But the programming style I've been using recently does the equivalent of > allowing any number of concurrent "BEGIN"s and handing back a handle for each > one. You can execute any number of commands (SELECT or write) for each > BEGIN, and then close the transaction with an "END" or "ROLLBACK". > > SQLite, of course, does not hand back a handle for each "BEGIN". A BEGIN > inside a transaction is, correctly, an error. But I find myself wanting to > handle my transactions more ... erm ... modularly. So if I was to change my > programming style accordingly ...
Do you mean nested transactions? In my home-grown C++ wrapper for sqlite I do this with a "transaction tracker" object that tracks the nesting level on a connection and executes a BEGIN (IMMEDIATE) if the nesting level == 0, and a "SAVEPOINT X" if the nesting level != 0, and if successful, a COMMIT if the level is 0, and a "RELEASE X" if the nesting level != 0. If the transaction is not successful and the nesting level is 0, it does a ROLLBACK, otherwise a "ROLLBACK TO X; RELEASE X" (Yes, the name of the savepoint is always X.) Works well. -- Ward _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
