<?xml version="1.0" encoding="windows-1252"?>
<node id="284525" title="Re: Re: Re: DBI recipes" created="2003-08-18 06:04:24" updated="2005-07-27 11:54:03">
<type id="11">
note</type>
<author id="116292">
mpeppler</author>
<data>
<field name="doctext">
&lt;blockquote&gt;
&lt;i&gt;When transactions are supported, while it is true that every update BELONGS TO a transaction, it is not true that every insertion IS a transaction.&lt;/i&gt;
&lt;/blockquote&gt;
I'm nitpicking, but with Oracle, DB2, Sybase, etc. every DML operation is run in a transaction. The transaction may automatically commit at the end of the operation (i.e. if AutoCommit is on), but there is always at least an implicit transaction as even a single row insert may in fact generate more operations through triggers (inserts to a shadow table, updates of summary tables, etc.) and these all will be guaranteed to perform as a single operation, even in the absence of explicit transactions in the DML.&lt;p&gt;
That being said I think that keeping the transaction logic out of the examples is a good thing, as long as their use and functionality is explained somewhere in the document - after all transactions are pretty central to RDBMS systems...&lt;p&gt;
Michael
</field>
<field name="root_node">
284436</field>
<field name="parent_node">
284521</field>
</data>
</node>
