Hi Henrik,

> (class +Article +Entity)
> (rel aid       (+Key +Number))
> (rel title     (+String))
> (rel type      (+String))
> (rel htmlUrl   (+Key +String))
> (rel body      (+Blob))
> (dm put> (Key Val)
>    (if (= Key 'body)
>       (prog
>          (put!> This 'body T)
>          (out (blob This 'body)
>             (prinl Val)))
>       (super Key Val)))

I didn't try this code, and have no direct explanation why you get an
error upon re-import, but I see a different problem:

It is not good to nest 'put!>' within 'put>'. 'put!>' builds its own
transaction with 'dbSync' and 'commit'. This means, that you get a
preliminary 'commit', which will unlock the database too early.
So the 'put!>' above should at least be a simple 'put>'. Then
we might simply use 'super' instead:

   (dm put> (Key Val)
      (ifn (== Key 'body)
         (super Key Val)
         (super 'body T)
         (out (blob This 'body)
            (prinl Val) ) ) )

As usual, this 'put>' must run in a transaction (surrounded by 'dbSync'
and 'commit'), of course.

I don't know if this solves the original problem though.

The same situation ('put!>' inside 'lose!>') we have here:

> (dm lose!> ()
>    (call 'rm (blob This 'body))
>    (put!> This 'body NIL)
>    (super))

In fact, I never directly remove blobs, and rely on the nightly garbage
collection to have them cleaned up. So the above 'lose!>' method might
simply be omitted.

- Alex
UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picol...@software-lab.de?subject=unsubscribe

Reply via email to