Subject | Re: [Firebird-Architect] AND CHAIN / AND NO CHAIN |
---|---|
Author | Daniel Rail |
Post date | 2004-06-07T22:25:02Z |
Hello David,
Monday, June 7, 2004, 6:29:08 PM, you wrote:
[start quote...]
9) The current SQL-transaction is terminated. If AND CHAIN was
specified, then a new SQL-transaction is initiated with the same
access mode, isolation level, and diagnostics area limit as the
SQL-transaction just terminated. Any branch transactions of the
SQL-transaction are initiated with the same access mode, isolation
level, and diagnostics area limit as the corresponding branch of the
SQL-transaction just terminated.
[...end quote]
If AND CHAIN or AND NO CHAIN is specified then AND NO CHAIN is
implicit.
Don't you think that AND CHAIN is quite similar to RETAINING?
--
Best regards,
Daniel Rail
Senior Software Developer
ACCRA Group Inc. (www.accra.ca)
ACCRA Med Software Inc. (www.filopto.com)
Monday, June 7, 2004, 6:29:08 PM, you wrote:
> judging by what chain seems to mean with other dbs,Here's what is the definition associated with AND CHAIN, in SQL-2003:
> + chain means immediately start a new transaction
> - chain means start autocommit.
> I could be wrong here...
> I'd also be surprised if sql 2003 has a concept of "retaining"
[start quote...]
9) The current SQL-transaction is terminated. If AND CHAIN was
specified, then a new SQL-transaction is initiated with the same
access mode, isolation level, and diagnostics area limit as the
SQL-transaction just terminated. Any branch transactions of the
SQL-transaction are initiated with the same access mode, isolation
level, and diagnostics area limit as the corresponding branch of the
SQL-transaction just terminated.
[...end quote]
If AND CHAIN or AND NO CHAIN is specified then AND NO CHAIN is
implicit.
Don't you think that AND CHAIN is quite similar to RETAINING?
--
Best regards,
Daniel Rail
Senior Software Developer
ACCRA Group Inc. (www.accra.ca)
ACCRA Med Software Inc. (www.filopto.com)