I could be wrong, but I suspect we're doing it this way to be able to do changes to several objects atomically, and roll back the transactions if at some point in time what we're trying to accomplish is not possible.
Thoughts? On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 10:06 AM, Gary Kotton <gkot...@vmware.com> wrote: > Hi, > > It seems like a lot of the object work is being done under database > transactions. My understanding is that the objects should take care of this > internally. > > Any thoughts? > > Thanks > > Gary > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > >
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
