Re: [sqlite] sqlite3_changes question

>> > I don't know for sure, but I suspect it would be the same. It seems > like > it should be simple enough to try it out both ways. > > Dennis Cote It seems too, and the description in the help implies that it does, but I wanted to double check. I have logic that reacts based on that return

Re: [sqlite] sqlite3_changes question

Fin Springs wrote: > > A related question: If I do an UPDATE not in an explicit transaction, > it will create an implicit transaction. Is that implicit transaction > the equivalent of wrapping the UPDATE in BEGIN IMMEDIATECOMMIT? > If not, which BEGIN x is it equivalent to? I believe i

Re: [sqlite] sqlite3_changes question

Fin Springs wrote: > > My question is, if I changed > the statement in the single exec call to "BEGIN IMMEDIATE;UPDATE > foo...;COMMIT", will sqlite3_changes still return the same value as > before? Or do I need to make the BEGIN/COMMIT in separate exec calls > from the UPDATE to get my co

Re: [sqlite] sqlite3_changes question

On Apr 17, 2008, at 5:05 PM, Fin Springs 20dkom502-at-sneakemail.com | sqlite| wrote: > If I do: > > sqlite3_exec(..."UPDATE foo..."...) > > and then: > > numChanges = sqlite3_changes() > > I get the number of updated rows back. My question is, if I changed > the statement in the single exec