dimas-b commented on code in PR #1070:
URL: https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/1070#discussion_r1974432975


##########
polaris-core/src/main/java/org/apache/polaris/core/persistence/transactional/TransactionalPersistence.java:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,259 @@
+/*
+ * Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
+ * or more contributor license agreements.  See the NOTICE file
+ * distributed with this work for additional information
+ * regarding copyright ownership.  The ASF licenses this file
+ * to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
+ * "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
+ * with the License.  You may obtain a copy of the License at
+ *
+ *   http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+ *
+ * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
+ * software distributed under the License is distributed on an
+ * "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
+ * KIND, either express or implied.  See the License for the
+ * specific language governing permissions and limitations
+ * under the License.
+ */
+package org.apache.polaris.core.persistence.transactional;
+
+import jakarta.annotation.Nonnull;
+import jakarta.annotation.Nullable;
+import java.util.List;
+import java.util.function.Supplier;
+import org.apache.polaris.core.PolarisCallContext;
+import org.apache.polaris.core.entity.EntityNameLookupRecord;
+import org.apache.polaris.core.entity.PolarisBaseEntity;
+import org.apache.polaris.core.entity.PolarisEntitiesActiveKey;
+import org.apache.polaris.core.entity.PolarisEntityCore;
+import org.apache.polaris.core.persistence.BasePersistence;
+import org.apache.polaris.core.persistence.IntegrationPersistence;
+
+/**
+ * Extends BasePersistence to express a more "transaction-oriented" control 
flow for backing stores

Review Comment:
   I have the concern with this approach as I put in 
https://lists.apache.org/thread/rf5orxs815zs4h64p4rwp03q3pbgxb5r
   
   TL;DR: If we go with the semantics of "change is durable after a persistence 
API method call returns", then any kind API grouping (e.g. a few operations in 
the same Tx) is not logically correct, because the caller of the "wrapped" 
persistence deals with the same interface and can expect each call's changes to 
be durable independently of other calls' changes. This does not hold when 
actual changes are committed only at the end of a transaction. 



-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]

Reply via email to