On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 3:51 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny <[email protected]>wrote:
> Hi, > > I'm fixing tests in core-integ, and so far, I still have some issues in > uathz (SearchAuthorizationIT) and in schema. All the other tests are now > passing. > > I have moved the txns borders into the OperationManager, and for searches, > the cursor commit or abort the txn in the close() and close(exception) > methods. > > Why is the OM better than the CoreSession? Just curious what made you choose this route. Forgive me if this was discussed in an earlier email. > I think we should find a way to implicitely commit or abort the txns even > if the user does not close() the cursors, otherwise it might be extremely > painful for them. I was thinking about adding a finalaizer in the cursor to > finish the txns, but it's not a perfect solution (as it depends on the GC > to be executed. Oh please don't do this - we should be able to find a better solution I am sure. There are a myriad of reasons why this is a bad idea IMHO. We can discuss this once I settle down in one place .. .still traveling. > Damn I miss the C++ explicit destuctors :/). > Something more useful would be to allow any txns to reuse an existing > txns. YES this is what we need to do for re-entry but there may need to be some configurable parameter for this. Maybe we can Skype on this to be fast and report back to the ML. > Of course, there are some drawbacks, but I think it's probably a better > approach. > > +1 -- Best Regards, -- Alex
