List:General Discussion« Previous MessageNext Message »
From:b b Date:July 30 2003 3:11am
Subject:Re: Transactions
View as plain text  
 Good point. However, I disagree with you on
fundemental points. Subsystems within an application
should remain indepedant for a easier maintanance and
better software development process. 

 Here we have a multi tiered system whereby the
database can't guarantee it's integrity without good
clients. Thats not very sustainable and defeats the
purpose of having functionality distributed among
different components. 

 Deleting, updating and insertions should be done
correctly on the database level. In the example i
gave, there is no guarantee that the client will try
to do the insertion again. What if we have more than
one client? lets say a web browser. Should we rely on
the user hitting reload? Now we are relying on the
good practice of the user to keep the db integral ....

 Fortunately Scott Helms reminded us that mysql 4 does
include the innodb which are transactional tables. I
will give that a shot. 

 Thanks for the comment.

--- Dan Nelson <dnelson@stripped> wrote:
> In the last episode (Jul 29), b b said:
> > Most web hosting companies run the mysql standard.
> Which means one
> > can't run transactions. If that is the case, then
> how do you handle
> > many to many relationships with truely normalized
> manner without
> > risking data corruption
> > 
> > For example: You have an org, ctry tables and a
> middle table orgCtry.
> > The middle table has the two foriegn keys one from
> org and one from
> > ctry. This way an org could be operating in many
> countries and a
> > country could have many organizations.
> > 
> > Now to insert an organization "AAA" that operates
> in USA, Canada, and
> > Argentina one would need typically to do four sql
> statements:
> >   insert into org(name, .....
> >   get the newly inserted org ID 
> >   insert into orgCtry(ID for org, ID for USA) ...
> >     insert into orgCtry(ID for org, ID for Canada)
> ...
> >   insert into orgCtry(ID for org, ID for
> Argentina)
> > ...
> > 
> >  To do the above securely one has to put it in a
> transaction. If
> You really mean "To do the above atomically" here. 
> You can still do it
> securely, but you have to make the client
> apppplication smarter.  If
> the server crashes after the 2nd insert, you end up
> with 1 record in
> orgName and 1 in orgCtry.  So when the end-user
> retries the request,
> the client has to realize that AAA already exists
> and simply insert the
> remaining two records.
> When you decide to delete the "AAA" user, make sure
> you delete
> dependent records first.  So remove the orgCtry
> records before removing
> the parent record in org.  Otherwise, if the server
> crashes, you end up
> with dangling records that you have to clean up in a
> maintenence script
> (not difficult, but not necessary if you delete in
> the right order).
> Transactions are most important in places where you
> have to update
> multiple records or tables, and /cannot/ allow a
> partial update
> (double-entry bookkeeping, etc).  Foreign keys (and
> subqueries) are
> handy to have, but you can always duplicate their
> functionality with
> extra code in the client.
> -- 
> 	Dan Nelson
> 	dnelson@stripped

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
Transactionsb b29 Jul
  • Re: TransactionsDan Nelson29 Jul
    • Re: Transactionsb b30 Jul
      • Re: TransactionsPatrick Sherrill30 Jul
        • Re: Transactionsb b30 Jul
        • Re: TransactionsKaarel31 Jul
          • Re: TransactionsStephan Lukits1 Aug
  • Re: TransactionsPatrick30 Jul
  • Re: TransactionsPaul DuBois30 Jul
RE: TransactionsGilbert Wu30 Jul