On 05.09.18 19:19, Thomas Vandahl wrote: > On 03.09.18 05:32, Thomas Fox wrote: >> As I understand it, TorqueConnectionImpl.committed and >> TorqueConnectionImpl.rolledBack keep track of whether there could be >> outstanding operations in a transaction. So when one calls close() on a >> connection with uncommitted changes these get rolled back. But what if one >> calls commit() and then does other operations on the connection? As I >> understand the javadoc of java.sql.Connection, this is legal (maybe I'm >> wrong). But the current logic in TorqueConnectionImpl would not do any >> rollback on close() then. > > I will have to check what the contract actually is. The implementation > right now is more or less a 80% solution.
The Javadoc of close() actually says: It is strongly recommended that an application explicitly commits or rolls back an active transaction prior to calling the close method. If the close method is called and there is an active transaction, the results are implementation-defined. As I read it, this gives us some freedom in the "definition of our implementation". Bye, Thomas --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: torque-dev-unsubscr...@db.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: torque-dev-h...@db.apache.org
