Le Tuesday 13 May 2008 20:02:42 Dieter Maurer, vous avez écrit :
> Someone convinced us that error handling should (of course)
> see the state the error happened and not a new clean state -- in
> order to be able to report about the errorneous state....
Then, in my opinion, it should not be executed "inside" what failed, but in a
clean environment with a "pointer" (in non-technical meaning) to the failed
Or there must be some special directives about what can or cannot happen in an
error handler (but I guess it's just too hard to make sure nothing joins a
transaction, for example fetching a page template from ZODB to render the
error will join the transaction).
> Another reason was also: should your error template need to run
> in a fresh transaction, then just abort the old one.
How ? IIRC it's a bad coding practice to interact with transaction mechanism
from what's considered as "inside" a transaction (ZPublisher being the
> If the transaction were aborted before error handling, then
> an error template with different requirements does not have a chance....
Maybe 2 cases should be handled differently:
- exception happened when processing transaction: do not abort immediately
- exception happened in transaction handling (hopefully only in "commit"):
abort to offer error handling a "usable" environment
Anyway, I opened a bug in the bugtracker about this problem, because it's a
separate issue from the TM.py problem:
For more information about ZODB, see the ZODB Wiki:
ZODB-Dev mailing list - ZODB-Dev@zope.org