Re: AW: BLERe: AW: AW: relation ### modified while in use

At 18:31 24/10/00 +0900, Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
>
>
>Zeugswetter Andreas SB wrote:
>
>> > > > Are there many applications which have many SELECT statements(without
>> > > > FOR UPDATE) in one tx ?
>> > >
>> > > Why not ?
>> > >
>> > It seems to me that multiple SELECT statements in a tx has little
>> > meaning unless the tx is executed in SERIALIZABLE isolation level.
>>
>> E.g. a table is accessed multiple times to select different data
>> in an inner application loop. No need for serializable here.
>>
>
>And seems no need to execute in one tx.
>Hmm,we seems to be able to call a cleanup procedure
>internally which is equivalent to 'commit' after each
>consecutive read-only statement.  Is it a problem ?

I have not followed the entire thread, but if you are in a serializable OR
repeatable-read transaction, I would think that read-only statements will
need to keep some kind of lock on the rows they read (or the table).


----------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Warner                    |     __---_____
Albatross Consulting Pty. Ltd.   |----/       -  \
(A.B.N. 75 008 659 498)          |          /(@)   ______---_
Tel: (+61) 0500 83 82 81         |                 _________  \
Fax: (+61) 0500 83 82 82         |                 ___________ |
Http://www.rhyme.com.au          |                /           \|                                |    --________--
PGP key available upon request,  |  /
and from pgp5.ai.mit.edu:11371   |/