Il giorno lun, 21/01/2008 alle 20.09 +0900, James Henstridge ha scritto: > > IMHO, it should raise an error if the transaction was started for > > two-phase. Otherwise I don't see any reason for (1). > > I disagree here. If a problem is detected early in the transaction, > calling prepare() before rollback() on the other members of the global > transaction is a waste of effort. > > As for commit(), the transaction manager can use one-phase commit for > the last resource without integrity problems. I don't see much value > in preventing this optimisation.
I agree on rollback(), not on commit(). If the transaction manager wants to use one-phase it should do that explicitly. Allowing to call commit on a two-phase transaction without first preparing it is prone to errors and can lead to subtle errors like depending on it creating a "standard" transaction on some backends and not on others. federico -- Federico Di Gregorio http://people.initd.org/fog Debian GNU/Linux Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] INIT.D Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] When people say things are a lot more complicated than that, they means they're getting worried that they won't like the truth. -- Granny Weatherwax
signature.asc
Description: Questa รจ una parte del messaggio firmata digitalmente
_______________________________________________ DB-SIG maillist - DB-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/db-sig
