Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2001 7:59 PM
To: Neil Lunn
Cc: 'Tim Bunce'; Sterin, Ilya; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: executing atomic transactions in DBI
On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 09:54:30AM +1000, Neil Lunn wrote:
> >
> > but now I've changed it to say:
> >
> >
> > As long and the words 'warn' and 'die' are listed in the
> documentation I
> > agree that this should be very clear.
> > Umm. Does that just mean in the docs or :
> >
> > -if (!raise_error || (diehook && SvOK(diehook)))
> > +if (!raise_error)
>
> The internal code is
On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 09:54:30AM +1000, Neil Lunn wrote:
> >
> > but now I've changed it to say:
> >
> > : If you turn C on then you'd normally turn
> > C off.
>
> I like that, it's an important statement to make.
>
> > : If C is also on, then the C is done
> > first (naturally).
> >
> >
> -Original Message-
> From: Tim Bunce [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2001 7:07 AM
> To: Sterin, Ilya
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: executing atomic transactions in DBI
>
>
> but now I've changed it to s
On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 08:42:40AM -0600, Sterin, Ilya wrote:
> Now as I read it a few times, I can make sense out of it. Just a long day
> yersterday. Although it can be a little bit more clearly explained for
> challenged people like myself:-)
>
> I guess maybe reverse thinking...
>
> ***
>
t defined, so that
condition is more commone and should come first. Anyone??
Ilya Sterin
-Original Message-
From: Tim Bunce
To: Sterin, Ilya
Cc: 'Tim Bunce '; '''Neil Lunn ' ' '; ''''[EMAIL PROTECTED]' ' ' '
S
AIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2001 04:42
Subject: Re: executing atomic transactions in DBI
> On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 04:49:59PM -0600, Peter J. Schoenster wrote:
> >
> > eval {
> > my $sql = qq|INSERT INTO company_profile
> > (company_description,company_name,cul
On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 11:06:58AM -0600, Sterin, Ilya wrote:
> In the docs shouldn't this be changed...
>
> ***
>If `PrintError' is also on, then the
> `PrintError' is done before the `RaiseError'
> ***
>
> to
>
> ***
>
>If `PrintError' is also on, then the
> `
On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 04:49:59PM -0600, Peter J. Schoenster wrote:
>
> eval {
> my $sql = qq|INSERT INTO company_profile
> (company_description,company_name,culture,employees,employer
> _id,growth_rate,leadership,mission,sec_fillings_url,type,url,year)
> VALUES(?,?,?,?,?,?,?,?,?,?,?,?)|
l Lunn ' '; '''[EMAIL PROTECTED]' ' '
Sent: 05/08/2001 10:40 AM
Subject: Re: executing atomic transactions in DBI
On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 08:26:43AM -0600, Sterin, Ilya wrote:
> Here are the quotes from the docs regarding PrintError
>
>
>
Got it, thanks.
Ilya Sterin
-Original Message-
From: Tim Bunce
To: Sterin, Ilya
Cc: 'Tim Bunce '; ''Neil Lunn ' '; '''[EMAIL PROTECTED]' ' '
Sent: 05/08/2001 10:40 AM
Subject: Re: executing atomic transactions in DBI
On Tue,
On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 08:26:43AM -0600, Sterin, Ilya wrote:
> Here are the quotes from the docs regarding PrintError
>
>
>
> PrintError' (boolean, inherited)
> This attribute can be used to force
> errors to generate warnings (using `warn')
> in addition
rror message and then RaiseError is
called, which will call die() but without the error message? Wouldn't $@ be
and empty string then?
Ilya Sterin
-Original Message-
From: Tim Bunce
To: Sterin, Ilya
Cc: 'Neil Lunn '; ''[EMAIL PROTECTED]' '
Sent: 05/08/2
Original Message-
> From: Neil Lunn
> To: Sterin, Ilya; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Sent: 05/07/2001 9:38 PM
> Subject: RE: executing atomic transactions in DBI
>
> Should this really be discussed off the list? Abolutely not.
>
> Ilya, your connect string in this scri
m: Neil Lunn
To: Sterin, Ilya; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Sent: 05/07/2001 9:38 PM
Subject: RE: executing atomic transactions in DBI
Should this really be discussed off the list? Abolutely not.
Ilya, your connect string in this script uses PrintError, as you
knowingly
mention yourself. I though
From: "Michael A Mayo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: executing atomic transactions in DBI
Date sent: Mon, 7 May 2001 14:27:40 -0400
Michael,
> > if the commit() is pla
From: Neil Lunn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: executing atomic transactions in DBI
Date sent: Tue, 8 May 2001 13:38:33 +1000
Neil,
meanwhile I have performed some experiments and found out
better way to do it, it will almost certainly end up in the documentation.
Neil
> -Original Message-
> From: Sterin, Ilya [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2001 12:32 AM
> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Subject: RE: executing atomic transactions
> Sorry to interfere so late in this thread, but
>
> if the commit() is placed here, won't it be always executed, because
> there are no die statements which stop code execution upon errors
> before ? Shouldn't committing be made dependent of the value of $@
> like
>
> if ($@) {
> warn
- Original Message -
From: "Bodo Eing" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: executing atomic transactions in DBI>
> if the commit() is placed here, won't it be always executed, because
> there are no die statements which stop code execution upon errors
> befo
'[EMAIL PROTECTED] '
Sent: 05/07/2001 8:05 AM
Subject: Re: executing atomic transactions in DBI
>>>>> "Ilya" == Sterin, Ilya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ilya> Not sure what you consider a rumor, I just simply stated having
Ilya> a problem with it b
> "Ilya" == Sterin, Ilya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ilya> Not sure what you consider a rumor, I just simply stated having
Ilya> a problem with it before and that in my experience I always
Ilya> check for return value, due to either the query failing and/or
Ilya> executing without failing, bu
PROTECTED]
To: Sterin, Ilya
Cc: Stephen Clouse; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 05/06/2001 10:47 PM
Subject: Re: executing atomic transactions in DBI
>>>>> "Sterin," == Sterin, Ilya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Sterin> There is no || die anywhere in that e
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Sterin, Ilya
Cc: Stephen Clouse; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 05/06/2001 10:47 PM
Subject: Re: executing atomic transactions in DBI
>>>>> "Sterin," == Sterin, Ilya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Sterin&
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, May 05, 2001 at 06:28:44PM -0400, Sterin, Ilya wrote:
> There is no || die anywhere in that eval? Even with RaiseError => 1 turned
> on, in many cases the transaction does not fail, if not checking for some
> sort of return.
To paraphrase th
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 08:47:38AM +0200, Bodo Eing wrote:
> if the commit() is placed here, won't it be always executed, because
> there are no die statements which stop code execution upon errors
> before ? Shouldn't committing be made dependent o
From: "Peter J. Schoenster" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Organization: Schoenster
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date sent: Sun, 6 May 2001 19:31:31 -0600
Subject: RE: executing atomic transactions in DBI
Send reply to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Randal L. Schwartz) writes:
> > "Sterin," == Sterin, Ilya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Sterin> There is no || die anywhere in that eval? Even with
> Sterin> RaiseError => 1 turned on, in many cases the transaction does
> Sterin> not fail, if not checking for some sort
> "Sterin," == Sterin, Ilya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Sterin> There is no || die anywhere in that eval? Even with
Sterin> RaiseError => 1 turned on, in many cases the transaction does
Sterin> not fail, if not checking for some sort of return.
I think this is FUD. My understanding is that
On 5 May 2001, at 18:28, Sterin, Ilya wrote:
> There is no || die anywhere in that eval? Even with RaiseError => 1
> turned on, in many cases the transaction does not fail, if not
> checking for some sort of return. You are right, that eval does exit
> on error, I think I replied a little to qu
-Original Message-
From: Stephen Clouse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, May 05, 2001 6:00 PM
To: Sterin, Ilya
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: executing atomic transactions in DBI
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, May 05, 2001 at 12:04:11PM
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, May 05, 2001 at 12:04:11PM -0400, Sterin, Ilya wrote:
> The problem with putting it into an eval block is that it will be commited
> no matter what and then your rollback statement is useless. You should
> really check on status of execute to
: executing atomic transactions in DBI
On 4 May 2001, at 14:46, traja wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have 2 insert statements which insert data into two different
> tables. These 2 inserts need to be run atomically, How can I do this?
> If I commit at the end of the two inserts, would that work?
On 4 May 2001, at 14:46, traja wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have 2 insert statements which insert data into two different
> tables. These 2 inserts need to be run atomically, How can I do this?
> If I commit at the end of the two inserts, would that work?
If your rdbms supports it and you have autocommit
Traja,
Yes, that would work. That's the whole purpose of commit;
Mark
- Original Message -
From: "traja" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 11:46 PM
Subject: executing atomic transactions in DBI
> Hi,
>
> I have 2 insert statements which insert d
35 matches
Mail list logo
