Should I commit or rollback a read transaction?
You commit. Period. There's no other sensible alternative.
If you started a transaction, you should close it. Committing releases any locks you may have had, and is equally sensible with ReadUncommitted or Serializable isolation levels. Relying on implicit rollback - while perhaps technically equivalent - is just poor form.
If you haven't changed anything, then you can use either a COMMIT or a ROLLBACK. Either one will release any read locks you have acquired and since you haven't made any other changes, they will be equivalent.
I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.
Related Questions
With NHibernate and Transaction do I rollback on commit failure or does it auto rollback on single commit?
After NHibernate Commit Transaction received 'The COMMIT TRANSACTION request has no corresponding BEGIN TRANSACTION?
Is it a better practice to explicitly call transaction rollback or let an exception trigger an implicit rollback?
Should I commit or rollback a transaction that creates a temp table, reads, then deletes it?
How can I take a function out of a commit/rollback process without modifying the logic in the calling COMMIT SYS Parent function?
Db transaction (commit and rollback) in datastage?