Jonathan Vanasco wrote: > On Jul 9, 2007, at 6:51 PM, mla wrote: >> Is there any reason not to support nested transactions at the app >> level? I find them very useful. Otherwise you have to make sure your >> transactions are always at the top-level, which makes things more >> error-prone, IMO. >> > > my guess is that they're a nightmare to code for, and only used by so > few people. there are so many other features/support that are > needed, and appeal to more users.
Hmmm. You mean a nightmare to use? They seem really natural to me. Many other ORMs seem to implement them. http://tangram.utsl.gen.nz/docs/Tangram/Tour.html#transactions http://search.cpan.org/~danieltwc/DBIx-Class-0.07002/lib/DBIx/Class/Manual/Cookbook.pod#Transactions >> But now I need nested transactions if I'd going to make do_transfer() >> part of a larger transaction. >> >> How do you guys handle that? > > would this help? > http://search.cpan.org/~crakrjack/DBIx-Transaction-0.008/ > > I use something similar -- a db factory with handle wrappers that are > transaction aware. the only difference between what i use and tylers > is that i overload connect as a transaction start . otherwise, i > like tylers interface much more than my own, and am hoping to migrate > to it soon. Yes, thank you. That seems like a nice general solution. I'll try to get that working with Rose::DB. Do you use Rose::DB's do_transaction() or your own interface? Maurice ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ _______________________________________________ Rose-db-object mailing list Rose-db-object@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rose-db-object
