On 27 Jun 2007 at 9:45, John Siracusa wrote: > > And if it works in principle do I have to stuff the $dbh manually into every > > RDBO object or does it "just work" because Apache::DBI takes care that RDBO > > gets the right (perhaps reused) handle even if RDBO always requests a fresh > > one? > > If you use the default init_db() implementation (which just returns > Rose::DB->new), then under Apache::DBI, all Rose::DB::Object objects > will have their own Rose::DB object, but every Rose::DB object will > share a single DBI $dbh (and therefore a single database connaction). > This is the setup that I use. > > More discussion in this thread: > > http://www.mail-archive.com/rose-db-object@lists.sourceforge.net/msg01803.html
Perhaps I am too stupid to grasp it but even after reading most of this thread I still don't understand why this is safe (I would like it to be, of course) Think of this scenario (all with a mod_perl app with many users): User one submits a form that does two loosely related write operations (no RDBO sub-objects) after the first $obj->save the request of another user is finished and does a commit. Now -- because both share the same $dbh/connection due to Apache::DBI -- the save of user one is also commited and if something goes wrong in the second write operation data integrity is lost. What did I miss? Michael ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Rose-db-object@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rose-db-object
