On 14.08.2007 18:54 Perrin Harkins wrote:
> On 8/14/07, John Siracusa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> The simplest way to do this is to leave everything as per the
>> defaults, and just use Apache::DBI.
>
> Note that Apache::DBI also does the automatic rollback for you, but
> only if you have AutoCommit off when you connect. If you connect with
> AutoCommit on, you have to handle the rollback yourself.
Perhaps I am just doing some stupid mistake but this was exactly where I
started off and where it didn't work. Well, I didn't set AutoCommit
explicitly, so that might have been on but I use Apache::DBI and at the
beginning I had init_db { My::DB->new() } as suggested by John.
But then I noticed that there was "too much" rollback that is:
$db->begin_work
my $obj = Products->new(db => $db);
...
$obj->save;
some_helper_that_uses_db(); # rollback here
my $obj2 = Customers->new(db => $db);
...
$obj2->save;
$db->commit;
When I ran this code $obj2 was saved but $obj was rolled back. I am sure
it was rolled back, because I got a record_id after the save
(autoincrement primary key column) but later when I wanted to redirect
my app to this record I got an error that there is no record with this
id. When I comment out the helper method, both objects are saved and
committed.
The helper isn't special but as it is it doesn't accept a 'db' argument,
so my guess was that when the chain of requests with always the same db
was broken, a rollback would occur. This led me to the construct with
the db cached in a closure as seen in my first post.
- Michael
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
_______________________________________________
Rose-db-object mailing list
Rose-db-object@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rose-db-object
