RE: Commitment Control

On Monday, July 13, 1998 8:47 AM, John Hall [SMTP:jhall@hillmgt.com] 
wrote:
> We are in the midst of doing some conversions to old software.  One of
> the programmer/consultants we brought in is arguing against setting up
> commitment control.  I feel that it is a feature we should be using.

Hear, hear!

> He feels that there may be too much overhead on the system.  We are
> going to enable journaling on all these files anyway.

If I remember correctly, journaling *is* the overhead involved in 
commitment control.

> What is the general feeling on this ?  If we are posting a batch of 500
> records should we commit on every record, every 10th record or after the
> entire batch ?

Commit a complete transaction set.

The idea is to be able to let your program back out changes for this 
transaction when you discover an error on one of the records in this set. 
 An example is writing financial records: often you'll be writing a bunch 
of debit records followed by a single credit record (to offset the DRs.) 
 If you get a problem writing the CR (say a duplicate key or invalid GL 
number) you'll want to back out all the DRs that correspond with the CR. 
 This way, your database stays "in balance."  If you were to commit each 
record you'd have no way to back them out if an error occurs down the 
line.

just my two centimes.

Buck Calabro
Commsoft, Albany, NY
mailto:mcalabro@commsoft.net

+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---