RE: CFLOCK instead of CFTRANSACTION

2002-10-04 Thread Pete Freitag
That will work as long as that CF server is the only thing that is inserting into foo. You might consider enforcing this with your database security. Only give insert permission on foo to your cfdbuser. _ Pete Freitag CTO, CFDEV.COM

RE: CFLOCK instead of CFTRANSACTION

2002-10-04 Thread Chad
MySQL can do transactions you just need to use the database type: InnoDB I have never use this myself, but according to the mysql.com documentation you can use it. -Original Message- From: Bryan Love [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 4:04 PM To: CF-Talk

RE: CFLOCK instead of CFTRANSACTION

2002-10-04 Thread Bryan Love
- From: Chad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 2:29 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFLOCK instead of CFTRANSACTION MySQL can do transactions you just need to use the database type: InnoDB I have never use this myself, but according to the mysql.com documentation you can use

RE: CFLOCK instead of CFTRANSACTION

2002-10-04 Thread Dave Watts
The MySQL driver does not support CFTRANSACTION. Except for the inability to rollback, does anyone see a problem with using a CFLOCK tag instead? cflock name=fooUpdate timeout=5 cfquery name= datasource=#request.mainDSN# INSERT INTO foo VALUES( bla bla