[racket-users] db: nested transactions

[George Neuner]

Hi all,

I have what I hope is a quick question.  WIth appropriate care to pair 
start and commit/rollback, is it safe to use call-with-transaction  and  
start-transaction  together?

e.g.,

  (call-with-transaction dbc
    (lambda ()
      :

      (start-transaction dbc #:isolation 'serializable)
         :
      (if (needs-rollback? dbc)
          (rollback-transaction dbc)
          (commit-transaction dbc))

      :
    ) #:isolation 'read-committed )

or the reverse:

  (start-transaction dbc #:isolation 'repeatable-read)
     :

    (call-with-transaction dbc
      (lambda ()
        :
      ) #:isolation 'serializable)

     :
  (if (needs-rollback? dbc)
      (rollback-transaction dbc)
      (commit-transaction dbc))



I am adding functionality involving sub-transactions to an existing code 
base that uses call-with-transaction pretty much exclusively and I'm 
hoping not to have to change the existing framework.

Thanks,
George

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket 
Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.