RE: ** commit or rollback - diff

From: Goulet, Richard <Richard.Goulet_at_parexel.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 08:56:28 -0500
Message-ID: <23C4836D8E9C5F4280A66C0C247BC16F23D1E390_at_US-BOS-MX011.na.pxl.int>

Joe,  

    No I don't think you dreamed up anything because I remember that same all the way back to V3. But in the case where you have no transactions open I do believe that a commit or rollback is basically the same.  

Dick Goulet  

---

From: TESTAJ3_at_nationwide.com [mailto:TESTAJ3_at_nationwide.com] Sent: Friday, February 13, 2009 8:52 AM
To: Goulet, Richard
Cc: ajoshi97_at_yahoo.com; oracle-l_at_freelists.org; oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org
Subject: RE: ** commit or rollback - diff

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

---

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.

From: 	"Goulet, Richard" <Richard.Goulet_at_parexel.com> 
To: 	<ajoshi97_at_yahoo.com>, <oracle-l_at_freelists.org> 
Date: 	02/13/2009 08:47 AM 
Subject: 	RE: ** commit or rollback - diff 
Sent by: 	oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org



________________________________

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

Dick Goulet

---

From: A Joshi [mailto:ajoshi977_at_yahoo.com <mailto:ajoshi977_at_yahoo.com> ]

Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2009 4:47 PM To: oracle-l_at_freelists.org; Goulet, Richard Subject: RE: ** commit or rollback - diff

Dick,
  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 <Richard.Goulet_at_parexel.com> wrote:

From: Goulet, Richard <Richard.Goulet_at_parexel.com> Subject: RE: ** commit or rollback - diff To: ajoshi977_at_yahoo.com, oracle-l_at_freelists.org 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: oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org
<mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org> ] On Behalf Of A Joshi

Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2009 4:32 PM To: oracle-l_at_freelists.org
Subject: ** commit or rollback - diff

Hi,

   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

--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l

Received on Fri Feb 13 2009 - 07:56:28 CST