I understand your semantic point but this helps no one. Coming from
other databases and SQL in general the term "transaction" has a very
specific meaning. So if the documentation talks about read
transactions in some places and shared locks in other places I think
these are different things.
Let's
Could you please understand that this is only a matter of language?
There is no hard thing as a read transaction. But it is commonly intuitive to
name a transaction as « read » as long as it did not started with write intent
and self-restraint itself from doing writes.
--
Best regards, Meilleu
PS: thank you for your long answer!
It's an interesting read and I think I will learn things.
But if "read transaction" is used dozens of times through the
documentation you shouldn't just say there is no such thing as a read
transaction if the documentation claims otherwise at so many places.
If
> There is no such thing as a "READ transaction".
Could you please open the following google query:
https://www.google.com/search?q=%22read+transaction%22+site%3Asqlite.org
There are 300 mentions of "read transaction" in the documentation and commits
mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Kira Backes
__
> Le 12 août 2019 à 12:11, Kira Backes a écrit :
>
> I have one question which popped up in my other thread: What are the
> differences between a SHARED lock and a READ transaction? Are there
> any differences at all? If so, are there also differences for WAL
> databases?
There is no such thing
Dear mailing list,
I have one question which popped up in my other thread: What are the
differences between a SHARED lock and a READ transaction? Are there
any differences at all? If so, are there also differences for WAL
databases?
Because from Rowan's reply it seems like it's the same. Is it re
6 matches
Mail list logo
