David Powell wrote: > John Forte wrote: > > I have two processes updating a property group simultaneously, or > > attempting to at least. Both transactions are started successfully. I > > assume there are no restrictions in having two transactions started > > against the same property group. The problem I have is that after one > > process successfully commits, when the second process executes the > > commit, the call to scf_transaction_commit appears to succeed but of > > course there was no write to the database. I'm trying to understand > > why an error is not set for the second commit. > > > > According to the manpage, it appears that there is no error for this > > scenario. > > From scf_transaction_commit(3SCF): > > RETURN VALUES > ... > The scf_transaction_commit() function returns 1 upon suc- > cessful commit, 0 if the property group set in > scf_transaction_start() is not the most recent, and -1 on > failure. > > How are you measuring success? No doubt incorrectly due to not RTFM. For my purposes, It would appear that I should be considering 0 and -1 a failure. I was measuring failure as -1. I'm still a bit confused as to why a failed commit should not return -1 (failure).
- John
