On Thursday 03 February 2005 00:46, Garrett Rooney wrote:
I'm wondering if the way transactions fit into the current API makes sense... Currently we've got a transaction argument that gets passed into each function that calls into the database. In the postgres impl all it seems to do is store an error value, which is used to bail out in the case where an error has already occurred.
It's essentially the same in the MySQL driver. It would certainly be possible to leave it to implementations to store the transaction in the dbd object. In fact you're probably right: the transaction API has already changed once in response to someone's suggestion on this list, and is looking a bit awkward - no doubt because I made the most obvious change rather than the best.
If you don't have any objection I'll look at pulling it out of the API and into the dbd object this weekend.
-garrett
