On 22 sept. 2013, at 20:38, Shai Berger <s...@platonix.com> wrote: > I would take Anssi's suggestion another step forward -- or backward, depends > where you're looking from :-) -- stop marking transactions for rollback. Make > save() and associates use savepoints, only on PostgreSQL, so that, > everywhere, > one may recover from database errors within the transaction.
The extra queries for the savepoints will break all tests that use assertNumQueries — well, all except assertNumQueries(0). How do you propose to deal with that. > (I am intimately familiar with a large code base that is full of such > recovery > attempts, mainly because PostgreSQL has never been a primary target; on > Sqlite, Oracle and SQL Server, these things work fine. I'm sure the case I > know > isn't the only one). Is this code base relying on Django's transaction management? In other words is it using `commit_on_success` or `atomic` to manage transactions? -- Aymeric. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
