RE: ** commit or rollback - diff

From: <>
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 08:51:35 -0500
Message-ID: <>

so it is just my imagination or does any else remember (the old days, of i think either v6 or 7 of oracle), when if you did a large transaction and decided to rollback and it was quick and a commit took a while, but then oracle did a switch since the majority of the time the commit was what happened and it was now quick and the rollback took time to complete, or did i just dream that whole thing up?


Joe Testa, Oracle Certified Professional Senior Consultant
Data Engineering and Administration
Nationwide Investments

(Work) 614-677-1668
(Cell) 614-312-6715

Interested in helping out your marriage? Ask me about "Weekend to Remember"
Dec 11-13, 2009 here in Columbus.

"Goulet, Richard" <> To:
<>, <> Date:
02/13/2009 08:47 AM
RE: ** commit or rollback - diff
Sent by:

From that point of view I do believe they are equal.  

Dick Goulet  

From: A Joshi [] Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2009 4:47 PM To:; Goulet, Richard Subject: RE: ** commit or rollback - diff


   Thanks. Yes, I see that from safety point of view. From performance point of view and resource consumption : which is faster? Or does it make no diff? I know commit is expensive operation : however : is that only if there are changes. Thanks

  • On Thu, 2/12/09, Goulet, Richard <> wrote: From: Goulet, Richard <> Subject: RE: ** commit or rollback - diff To:, Date: Thursday, February 12, 2009, 4:38 PM

Rollback is safer just incase you did a DML transaction without knowing it like inside a procedure.  

Dick Goulet  

From: [] On Behalf Of A Joshi
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2009 4:32 PM To:
Subject: ** commit or rollback - diff


    If I have not done a dml transaction in a session : no update, delete or insert etc. I have only done select and some of the objects can be over a db link. So I can do a commit or rollback so that no transaction is pending in my session. My question is : is there any difference in such case between the behaviour of commit and rollback. When there is no data as such to commit or rollback. I am thinking it is better to do rollback since it has to do less. Am I wrong. Any observation. Thanks for help. Thanks

Received on Fri Feb 13 2009 - 07:51:35 CST

Original text of this message