On 23/12/2010, at 5:38 PM, Drake Wilson wrote: > Quoth BareFeetWare <list....@barefeetware.com>, on 2010-12-23 15:10:30 +1100: >> Is there a way to do this in pure SQL, without my application code >> having to check for errors along the way and then interrogate the >> SQL to look for a "commit" type line and replace it? This seems >> pretty error prone and convoluted. > > Why would you introspect the SQL
I want to avoid having to introspect. > rather than generating the beginning and end of the transaction from a > different part of the application code to each statement inside? Begin > transaction, then start executing statements from a list; if any of them > fail, stop executing further statements and roll back, otherwise commit at > the end. Don't > include the begin/end in the list. Does that not work for you? It works, but it requires a whole extra level of interaction, whereas I want to SQL to take care of it itself, without needing to dissect and branch the SQL in application code. I want to be able to just send a series of SQL commands in a transaction as a one block of text and have SQLite tell me either that it succeeded so committed, or that it failed so everything has been rolled back. It is my understanding that this is one of the primary purposes of transactions. In this way, I can already string together a series of inserts, updates and deletes and execute as one block in a transaction, I'd like to be able to do the same with other SQL commands (eg drop and create). Thanks, Tom BareFeetWare -- Comparison of SQLite GUI tools: http://www.barefeetware.com/sqlite/compare/?ml _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
