Re: Oracle transactions and DDL statements.

<peter.koch.larsen_at_gmail.com> wrote in message news:1147208979.810778.181060_at_j73g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> DA Morgan skrev:
>
> > peter.koch.larsen_at_gmail.com wrote:
> [sn]
> >
> > >
> > > Kind regards
> > > Peter
> > ip
> > TTBOMK it is impossible to perform DDL in Oracle with two commits
> > being issued. DDL is wrapped in the following structure before it
> > is executed.
> >
> > BEGIN
> > COMMIT;
> > -- your DDL statement here;
> > COMMIT;
> > END;
> > /
> >
> > What you didn't explain, as I read what you posted, is why the
> > commit is a problem. Why do you have uncommited transactional
> > data, when changing the data model?
> I do not have uncommitted data per se, but when I change the datamodel,
> this change involves several tables and triggers and might span more
> than one database (only one of them being from Oracle), There are also
> non-database subsystems that participate in the distributed
> transaction. The problem occurs if e.g. the non-database transaction
> must abort the transaction for one reason or the other.
> >
> > You need to appreciate that Oracle's concepts and architecture
> > are quite different from that of the other products you mention
> > and if you want to work in Oracle you need to work the way
> > Oracle works.
> Right. But thus time it is not a feature, but a limitation that is not
> as i see it is not in any way based on some requirement for logical
> consistency - more like the opposite if anything.
>
> /Peter
> > --
> > Daniel A. Morgan
> > University of Washington
> > damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
> > (replace x with u to respond)
> > Puget Sound Oracle Users Group
> > www.psoug.org
>

You shouldn't be creating objects in the middle of a transaction. Start or end the transaction before creating objects. Jim Received on Tue May 09 2006 - 20:20:48 CDT