#33882: async transaction.atomic
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: alex | Owner: nobody
Type: New feature | Status: new
Component: Database layer | Version: 4.0
(models, ORM) |
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: async | Triage Stage: Accepted
Has patch: 0 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Changes (by Carlton Gibson):
* keywords: => async
* component: Uncategorized => Database layer (models, ORM)
* stage: Unreviewed => Accepted
Comment:
OK, thanks for the update Alex. I'm going to Accept this, since it's a
desirable feature that transactions work in an async-context.
I'm half-inclined towards closing as `needsinfo` or marking as
`Someday/Maybe` as I suspect the implementation will require a bit more
than just adding the `sync_to_async()` wrappers. 🤔
I guess the first step would be to write some test cases for that and see
what issues arise and what the performance looks like. (From there it's
easier to see what's really involved.)
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/33882#comment:5>
Django <https://code.djangoproject.com/>
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/010701825d9ef8eb-feed3b7f-6484-43b4-8660-bd7cf28bd395-000000%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.
