On 4/14/07, Bill Moseley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So when that die is called the transaction is rolled back and nothing > sub outer() or do_stuff_and_send_mail() did is in the database. But, > the mail still got sent (probably saying something happened that > didn't.)
It sound like you want a way to make non-transactional things outside of the database transactional, so that the entire request succeeds or fails. There used to be a whole category of software dedicated to this, called TP Monitors. I usually keep database transactions as short as possible to help concurrency, so I wouldn't wrap a whole request in a transaction. The need for that depends on your application. > That's why it might make sense to stuff things like sending mail onto > an array in the stash to run if there's no exceptions. That sounds like a decent compromise between complexity and risk. A more complicated approach would be to write (or find) a transactional API for all the things you want to do, e.g. an e-mail class that doesn't actually send until it gets a commit(). In some cases, the object can keep track of what it did and provide a rollback() method. It's a heavy approach, and a lot of work. I still don't think this has much to do with nested database transactions though :) You could hit the same issue with one transaction or no database at all. - Perrin ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ _______________________________________________ Rose-db-object mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rose-db-object
