On Tue, 2004-05-11 at 13:04, Dieter Maurer wrote: > Hi Chris, > > Chris McDonough wrote at 2004-5-11 00:54 -0400: > > ... > >So what do folks think of this error-case transaction isolation patch? > >Michael's original patch is preserved here (although it didn't survive > >cut and paste from my mail client in a pristine way, you'll get the > >idea): > > > >http://www.plope.com/Members/chrism/transaction_isolation_error.patch/file_view > > > >Personally it looks fine to me. It wraps each error invocation in its > >own transaction. > > Please revisit the discussion (mostly between Toby and me) on > "zope-dev" about how to fix this problem. > > Toby convinced me that error handling should take place > in the same transaction as the original request (and not in its > own). > > His main argument: the traceback can contain references to persistent > objects that should not be there. If they are written to ZODB > in any way, all kinds of dubious inconsistencies can occur. > > Meanwhile, I saw several questions in the mailing lists of > people that wanted to access the SESSION object during > error handling (probably) because it contained useful information for > error handling. > This is impossible when the transaction is aborted before > error handling.
Right. I will try to work up another patch then. - C _______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
