*bump* Anyone have any other ideas / reasons for validations being within the transaction block?
I've been running rails patched for a few days and haven't had any problems.... would love some more reasoning, to find out if there is any future in my idea. cheers On Feb 21, 5:41 pm, "chrisfarms" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi... > > thanks this was closer to me giving in...but > > I'll just write out your example in pseudoness, Use your mind's > version of Thread to simulate this example... dave1 and dave2 > > 1) dave1.save > 1) dave2.save > > 2) transaction is started and dave1's state recorded for later > 2) transaction is started and dave2's state recorded for later > > 3) dave1 is found to be valid but some process is stuck in IO and > slows down] > 3) dave2 is found to be valid and continues to save > > 4) dave1 waits > 4) dave2 commits the save > > 5) dave1 saves fine unless an Exception is raised from the DB (or > anywhere) > 5) dave2 sulks > > you're case would still fail under the current implimentation, unless > you had placed some sort of restriction onto the column within your > database itself which could cause the DB adaptor to raise during > commit (5) > > .... the active record validations are all in Ruby-land they are only > useful for the very instance they are called (3).....inside or outside > of a transaction block..... hence the big lock. > > so... > > validations outside of the transactions? :) > > You're post did actually make me think of an improvement to the > validation system... that could actually solve the issue above.... > might make another post to suggest the idea. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" 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/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
