Hi Ryan,
On 6/23/2015 12:20 PM, Ryan Culpepper wrote:
Yes, that should be fine. One note about your sample code: the
isolation mode of inner transactions must be #f (the default); you
can't change isolation levels once you've started an outer
transaction. Also keep in mind that nested
On 06/24/2015 07:46 AM, George Neuner wrote:
Hi Ryan,
On 6/23/2015 12:20 PM, Ryan Culpepper wrote:
Yes, that should be fine. One note about your sample code: the
isolation mode of inner transactions must be #f (the default); you
can't change isolation levels once you've started an outer
[ Email says sending to the group failed. Apologies if this appears
multiple times. ]
Hi Ryan,
On 6/24/2015 10:06 AM, Ryan Culpepper wrote:
On 06/24/2015 07:46 AM, George Neuner wrote:
[He asks naively not having looked at the code:] Would it be hard to
keep savepoint creation if
Yes, that should be fine. One note about your sample code: the isolation
mode of inner transactions must be #f (the default); you can't change
isolation levels once you've started an outer transaction. Also keep in
mind that nested transactions are not supported for ODBC connections.
Ryan
Hi all,
I have what I hope is a quick question. WIth appropriate care to pair
start and commit/rollback, is it safe to use call-with-transaction and
start-transaction together?
e.g.,
(call-with-transaction dbc
(lambda ()
:
(start-transaction dbc #:isolation
On 22/06/2015 11:05, George Neuner wrote:
Hi all,
I have what I hope is a quick question. WIth appropriate care to pair
start and commit/rollback, is it safe to use call-with-transaction
and start-transaction together?
e.g.,
(call-with-transaction dbc
(lambda ()
:
6 matches
Mail list logo
