Re: frequent commits

xhoster_at_gmail.com wrote:
> The main argument against frequent commits is that you should commit
> when the transaction is done, and if that isn't frequent than the commits
> shouldn't be either.

True.

> A secondary argument is that commits are slow.

Commits are actually pretty fast. The thing is, it's no more costly to commit a transaction that updates 10,000 rows than it is to commit a transaction that updates only one row. But if you take that 10,000 row transation and commit, say every 10 rows you have to do 1000 commits, which will be ~1000x more expensive than one commit.

//Walt Received on Tue Jan 17 2006 - 13:53:46 CST