On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 5:15 PM, Brad House <
brad@...> wrote:
> On 04/26/2012 04:38 PM, Jos Groot Lipman wrote:
>
>> As far as I understand this means: you will not see changes made by other
>> connections (committed or uncommited) after your transaction started.
>> If another connections commits a change, you will not see it.
>> I would expect: If another connections rollbacks the change, you will not
>> see it either.
>>
>> Why whould anyone want an aborted read-transaction in this case?
>>
>
> I would agree ... I'd like to hear the other side of the story here
> so we understand why this change was made if it was indeed intentional.
>
> What purpose does this behavior serve? Not saying it is wrong at
> this point, just lacking information.
>
> Also would need to understand the scope of this behavior. Does
> that mean if any connection rolls back that immediately all other
> connections abort? Or is it only one very specific case that this
> occurs?
>
Only the connection that does the rollback has its queries aborted.
If you are seeing other connections get queries aborted, that is something
new that I have not seen before and will need to investigate.
If you do a ROLLBACK in the middle of a query, why would you ever want to
keep going with that query? What would you expect to see?
>
> Thanks.
> -Brad
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> sqlite-users mailing list
>
sqlite-users@...
>
http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-**bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-**users<
http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users>
>
--
D. Richard Hipp
drh@...
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@...
http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
