Re: (not entirely...) OT: OPINION... chicken entrails, runic stones, and crystal balls... WAS CoBOL moved to OO
From: Doug Scott (dwscott_at_ieee.org)
Date: 01/03/04
- Next message: Habitant: "Re: No panic - but .. Y2K + 4"
- Previous message: Doug Scott: "Re: (not entirely...) OT: OPINION... chicken entrails, runic stones, and crystal balls... WAS CoBOL moved to OO"
- In reply to: Pierra: "Re: (not entirely...) OT: OPINION... chicken entrails, runic stones, and crystal balls... WAS CoBOL moved to OO"
- Next in thread: Pierra: "Re: (not entirely...) OT: OPINION... chicken entrails, runic stones, and crystal balls... WAS CoBOL moved to OO"
- Reply: Pierra: "Re: (not entirely...) OT: OPINION... chicken entrails, runic stones, and crystal balls... WAS CoBOL moved to OO"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2004 21:30:06 GMT
Pierra,
> Many modern databases that only "journal" the results of a transaction
> cannot back these transactions out of a completed transaction. It's a
> shame, but we have progressed to the past.
Yes, but that's what the Commit verb does - it ends the transaction.
There are some 4GLs which try to avoid the explicit Commit, but there are
usually ways around it.
--- Doug dwscott@ieee.org
- Next message: Habitant: "Re: No panic - but .. Y2K + 4"
- Previous message: Doug Scott: "Re: (not entirely...) OT: OPINION... chicken entrails, runic stones, and crystal balls... WAS CoBOL moved to OO"
- In reply to: Pierra: "Re: (not entirely...) OT: OPINION... chicken entrails, runic stones, and crystal balls... WAS CoBOL moved to OO"
- Next in thread: Pierra: "Re: (not entirely...) OT: OPINION... chicken entrails, runic stones, and crystal balls... WAS CoBOL moved to OO"
- Reply: Pierra: "Re: (not entirely...) OT: OPINION... chicken entrails, runic stones, and crystal balls... WAS CoBOL moved to OO"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|