On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 1:37 PM, Chris McDonough <[email protected]> wrote:
> when using transactions, how all-in does > > one have to go? > > I guess in a sense the answer is "none" and "a lot" at the same time. > > The transaction machinery provides a hook to do something based on the > commit status. If the transaction has aborted, do X; if it has > committed, do Y. There's probably second-order details that would need > to be addressed in any particular integration that uses the after commit > hook but without seeing code it's hard to make any sort of general > statement about it. > Agreed; time for code. I might be able to take a crack at this. If you're using ZODB, you have Blob objects, which, although they're not > documented very well, make file IO 100% transactional. Yeah, I'm playing with them for the first time, thanks. No so far. ;-) But it probably will if it goes on much longer without > any code being shown. A codeless conversation seems more suited to be > had over a beer or in a consulting engagement than to be had over the > maillist, I think. > Right. I would love to buy you a beer; I see from the twitter that you like strong ales and so-on; my brother runs the local micro-brew supply shop and I'm in Madison, WI, which is good beer country. I don't think you're in Madison, WI. But yeah, time to code. Maybe. I really dont know. I've internalized the transaction pattern > so much and I've written so much code that relies on synchronization of > multiple storages via a single commit point that I tend to think of code > that uses multiple storages and which doesn't use a transaction manager > as broken by design. I think this may be my point, just I didn't know how to make it. Only "part" of Pyramid is transactional, and it's the good parts, but there seems to be a small bit of leakage, at least on the branch* that I'm following. (* Pyramid seems to have some branches of common patterns since it's so flexible: zodb/sqla, traversal/routes, etc.. I'm on the traversal, zodb, pyramid_mailer, pyramid_deform, pyramid_beaker path ) Those things above sound reasonable. (FTR, that's not me volunteering > to do them right now, just an agreement they sound reasonable and > deserve an entry in some TODO). So noted. For The Record. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pylons-discuss" 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/pylons-discuss?hl=en.
