Laszlo Nagy <nagylzs@gmail.com> added the comment: 2010/7/11 Terry J. Reedy <report@bugs.python.org>

Terry J. Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> added the comment:

If the content of the patch is correct, it looks ready to apply, with only a touch of editing. Do we have a resident expert of sqlite3? Or Laszlo, do you have a reference for the statements made?

Sorry, the only reference I have is that mailing list thread ( http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/2010-March/1239374.html ). There you can find an example with SQL statements, showing the problem. Ryan Kelly wrote the following: <quote> I have a theory, based on a quick perusal of the sqlite3 bindings source. The bindings think that "SAVEPOINT sp1" is a "non-DML, non-query" statement. So when isolation_level is something other than None, this statement implicitly commits the current transaction and throws away your savepoints! </quote> So the problem is with the sqlite binding code, not sqlite itself. I'm not an expert in C, so I'm not sure I can help more. Thanks, Laszlo ---------- Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file17940/unnamed _______________________________________ Python tracker <report@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue8145> _______________________________________