On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 11:50:04AM -0700, Darren Duncan wrote: > Tim Bunce wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 01:53:36PM -0500, David Dooling wrote: >>> If any of the SQL fails, then all the DB transactions are rolled back. >> >> If two databases are being used, and the commit to the first succeeds >> and the commit to the second fails, how does it "rollback" the first commit? > > Depending on the reason for failure, it could still be done when using > something like a two-phase commit protocol. This isn't a 100% solution, > but for the situations where it works you don't need to undo the succeeding > databases. -- Darren Duncan
I know. I was just asking a leading question to draw out the issue ;-) My point was the UR doesn't actually do what it was described as doing: "If any of the SQL fails, then all the DB transactions are rolled back." David as agreed in a folowup message. Tim.
