Ok,
it seems to me that our management of the removal is screwed up.
So when the call reaches the 'remove' we issue a real "remove" in DB and we
set the ID to null. Then when the transaction commits we do other stuff.
But if the transaction rollsback we rely on the connection to do its work
properly (not remove the instance), of course I *totally* trust the drivers
to implement this correctly <not!/>
Just for the love of symmetry ("all I do is think about you") we use the
"commits" to actually do the work in the database (store, work is done in
before completion). How come we don't do the remove work in there as well?
marc
________________
Marc Fleury, PhD
CTO, Telkel Inc.
________________
