Re: Commit after transacton is completed

From: Mark A <nobody_at_nowhere.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 15:45:13 -0700
Message-ID: <f72dnXDMnKFoDhrenZ2dnUVZ_tCdnZ2d@comcast.com>

"Sybrand Bakker" <postbus_at_sybrandb.demon.nl> wrote in message news:v03fo1hp6v5halhdqv2isv7d9bu0b6bmad_at_4ax.com...
> Please stop talking nonsense. It is quite common for a transaction to
> update 5000 records. Anyone stating otherwisw should better stick to
> their Mickey Mouse applications and use toy databases like Sqlserver
> et al.
> Sybrand Bakker, Senior Oracle DBA

It is possible, but it was not exactly clear how many updates he was talking about, since he said it took 5 minutes and there are 100,000 rows in the table. I believe that he was considering doing a commit every 500 rows instead of one commit after updating the entire table of 100,000 rows. I doubt that updating the entire table constitutes a logical transaction that must be in one unit of work.

I am not sure where you got 5000 rows, but I admit that his post was confusing on that point. Received on Fri Nov 25 2005 - 16:45:13 CST