Hi Pete Thanks for getting back to me.
On 24 December 2013 18:19, Peter Neubauer <[email protected]> wrote: > That's a good question. We debated the returning of an error if one of the > statements failed, but decided against it in order to be able to pinpoint > the error to the respective statement (there could be many). I think this is > intended behaviour. Are you suggesting that not returning an error somehow makes it easier to determine which statement had the error? If that's the case I must be missing something. If there's any sort of error I don't want to proceed. The transaction should roll back and the client be notified explicitly. What about the documentation? Is it wrong or have I misinterpreted it? And while I'm asking questions, when is the JSON syntax for a transaction so different that for /db/data/cypher? -- Thanks Paul Paul Grenyer e: [email protected] b: paulgrenyer.blogspot.com t: pjgrenyer Have you thought what Naked Element could do for you? http://nakedelement.co.uk/ It's time to get technical: http://norfolkdevelopers.com Norfolk Developers Conference is coming: http://nordevcon.com/ Enjoyed working with me? Something I could work on? Give me honest, anonymous feedback: https://www.get3sixty.com/:wehop -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Neo4j" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
