Re: PL SQL commit not really a commit (Was: benchmark to disprove myths)

From: Jaap W. van Dijk <j.w.vandijk.removethis_at_hetnet.nl>
Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 23:33:23 +0100
Message-ID: <ma92vuouek89bvdbpinsljfu17tqn9bhnd@4ax.com>

On Fri, 06 Dec 2002 23:26:21 +0100, Jaap W. van Dijk <j.w.vandijk.removethis_at_hetnet.nl> wrote:

>On Thu, 05 Dec 2002 20:54:00 +0000, Connor McDonald
><connor_mcdonald_at_yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>plsql may not be a good one to use for the test because commit are not
>>really commits so you get an artificial redo rate.
>>
>
>Okay, let's sidestep here for a moment. Can you tell me what is the
>difference between a COMMIT executed in say SQLPlus and one executed
>in PLSQL and where that is documented?
>
>Jaap.

I saw someone else beat me to it. Let's close this thread and continue the 'Re: commits are not really commits' thread. Received on Fri Dec 06 2002 - 16:33:23 CST