Re: JDBC problem

Today, in a message to John McKown, Cedar Cox wrote:
>
> On Fri, 25 Aug 2000, John McKown wrote:
> >
> > However, after thinking about it a bit, I would guess that the sequence is
> > "locked" for the duration of the transaction. This would imply that all
> > other transactions which needed to access the sequence would be stalled
> > until this transaction ended.

No, the sequence does not remain locked for the duration of the
transaction. If that was the case sequences would be nearly useless for
most applications.

> > The above is just my guess.

It is always dangerous to guess with these things. :-)

> This 'locking' thing was what I was wondering about. If 'sequence
> locking' does actually take place,

It doesn't.

> On the other hand, holes in a sequence shouldn't be an issue for us so
> 'no locking' would be just fine.

The purpose of these sequences is to generate unique keys, therefore,
holes don't matter.

Joachim

--
work: joachima(at)realtimeint(dot)com (http://www.realtimeint.com)
private: joachim(at)kraut(dot)bc(dot)ca (http://www.kraut.bc.ca)