Why serializable instead of repeatable_read?
OK, serializable then... According to the BOL, the only benefit of
serializable over repeatable_read is the prevention of phantoms, and I
can see that applying to this situation.
As far as sprocs are concerned... it's probably a fine idea, although
I've been leaning away from stored procedures in favor of CFQUERY
using cfqueryparam. I've got friends at the CFUG that have tested and
found that it's actually faster than sprocs, keeps the entire process
within the application, and doesn't tax the DBA's patience during the
development process. ;)
I'd rather, at this point, become an expert on CFTRANSACTION than
spend much more time becoming more of an expert on SQL. I never wanted
to be a DBA anyway. :) The 3 reasons I started using sprocs were: 1)
improved performance (negated by cfqueryparam, caching), 2) improved
encapsulation (negated by CFCs and improved DB performance in CFMX),
and 3) offloading processing from CF to SQL Server (negated by the
move to CFMX 6.1, improved hardware availability, and "other
factors"). I was looking for improved performance, for sure... but
what I really wanted was intelligent calls to the DB to do things like
analyze an input param, select data from 2 of the 3 user tables in
pairs, either from tbl_user and tbl_login or tbl_staff and tbl_login,
and return a pair of resultsets that would support my next round of
conditional logic all in one call to the DB.
It works, but I found it to be much less elegant than I expected. I'm
sure partly because I'm not a T-SQL developer, so I didn't make a
perfect job of it... but some of it is the nature of the beast. T-SQL
has limitations, and I believe that as I refactor the site and
continue to develop it that I'll be able to define much MORE elegant
ways of doing the same thing in CF. Starting with refining the
database design... because the tbl_login+tbl_{user_type} did NOT work
out as well as I'd hoped. Most annoying.
Anyway... that got long. I hope it didn't end up confusing.
Laterz,
J
On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 08:58:19 -0500, Adam Haskell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My personal preference would be to make a Store procedure that does it...
> It would follow the same basic concept as you already have only
> instead of it being written in CF it would be in SQL.
>
> Transaction serializable would be a good idea too.
>
> Adam H
>
--
Continuum Media Group LLC
Burnsville, MN 55337
http://www.web-relevant.com
http://cfobjective.neo.servequake.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Logware (www.logware.us): a new and convenient web-based time tracking
application. Start tracking and documenting hours spent on a project or with a
client with Logware today. Try it for free with a 15 day trial account.
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=67
Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:197825
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4
Unsubscribe:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
