Re: truncate randomly failing

Matthias Rogel <rogel_at_web.de> wrote in message news:<atcubv$12io17$1_at_ID-86071.news.dfncis.de>...
> Vladimir M. Zakharychev wrote:
> > "Joel Garry" <joel-garry_at_home.com> wrote in message
> >
> >
> >>Users view of sys.*$ is confused, because DDL is not transaction
> >>based.
> >
> >
> > Hmm... Are you saying that DDL violates ACID properties of the
> > database? Or do I read this sentence incorrectly?

Matthias and Jonathan pointed it out, but to be a bit more clear, it tries to maintain ACID by doing the commit, but after the commit there may be issues. Bug or design issues? Perhaps both. Erika's problem sure sounds like a bug, assuming it really happens to a single user. And I've seen similar things when I've been the only user on a new db.

> >
>
> well, what is your opinion to the following:
>
> as Jonathan Lewis pointed out, a truncate at first implicitly performs a
> commit.
> After the commit it still may fail (in case another user has
> meanwhile performed a lock on the table)
>
> in my opinion, the A in ACID is violated
> A = atomicity
>
> Matthias

jg

--
@home is bogus
http://www.garry.to