On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 04:45:06AM -0000, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote: > > > My position is that I'm open to being persuaded, but you'll have > > to put in the leg work. The best place for that at this stage is > > dbi-users as I'd like you to be able to show wider support for the > > proposals from the user community. > > That could be tough - savepoints were just recently added to PostgreSQL, > and I don't know enough about the typical users of the other RDBMSs. > However, all I would like at a minimum is the acceptance of > $dbh->savepoint and friends as a future addition, so that the next version > of DBD::Pg can use them instead of $dbh->pg_savepoint.
It's far better for an application to use pg_savepoint() than for the DBI to prematurely standardize on an API that has to change later. In general I don't add 'esoteric' features to the DBI API until at least two or three separate drivers have added driver-private APIs for the same feature. That way we have a range of practical experience to drawn on. > It's late. I will try and write up an API and a dbi-users proposal soon. Feel free to bounce it off me before sending to the list so save one round of debate on the first version. Tim.
