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 |/