On Nov 30, 7:32 pm, peterk <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm not sure if this would meet your needs or not, but it might be > something to look into. A book I was reading suggested transactional > enqueuing of tasks to get around having to keep all entities in a > single entity group, for certain kinds of transaction. > > So say in a transaction you need to read from one entity and write to > another. Using this method you could in a transaction read from the > first entity, and then enqueue a task to write to the second. > > The two entities can be in different entity groups, but the > transaction will ensure that the write task doesn't get enqueued if > the read on the first entity fails. So if the read fails, the write > will fail. > > The book notes that at the time of writing transactional task > enqueuing was not supported, but this may have changed by now (?)
Coming soon, apparently: http://www.reddit.com/r/AppEngine/comments/a6sjc/unreleased_new_feature_transactional_tasks_can/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
