On 5/30/2010 1:24 PM, Michael Bayer wrote:
On May 28, 2010, at 1:46 PM, Kent Bower wrote:
On 5/28/2010 10:08 AM, Michael Bayer wrote:
Is the pattern that you want to keep re-issuing a savepoint repeatedly using
the same name ? Does that have some different usage of resources versus
On May 31, 2010, at 8:24 AM, Kent Bower wrote:
Although sqla doesn't allow the user to specify the savepoint name, the same
could be accomplished given if support for the following were implemented:
Let me ask:
sp_a=begin_nested()
...
...
sp_b=begin_nested()
...
...
On 5/31/2010 9:55 AM, Michael Bayer wrote:
On May 31, 2010, at 8:24 AM, Kent Bower wrote:
Although sqla doesn't allow the user to specify the savepoint name, the same
could be accomplished given if support for the following were implemented:
Let me ask:
sp_a=begin_nested()
...
...
On May 31, 2010, at 10:28 AM, Kent Bower wrote:
that's how the engine-level API works - you get at a Transaction object that
you can roll back anywhere in the chain (its up to you to know that the
other Transaction objects in the middle are no longer valid).In the ORM
we wanted to
On May 28, 2010, at 1:46 PM, Kent Bower wrote:
On 5/28/2010 10:08 AM, Michael Bayer wrote:
Is the pattern that you want to keep re-issuing a savepoint repeatedly using
the same name ? Does that have some different usage of resources versus
issuing/closing distinct savepoints with different
On May 28, 2010, at 8:47 AM, Kent wrote:
Say I have this:
session().begin_nested()
try:
session.add(obj)
session.flush()
session.commit()
except:
session.rollback()
...
transaction.commit()
2 questions:
* I assume that the session.rollback() undoes the add(obj) -
* Is there a way besides session.commit() to free the savepoint
resource? Is there a way to provide the savepoint name, so I can use
the same name over? Lastly, if you aren't the expert, where would you
point me, zope group or TG group?
you could issue the SAVEPOINT instructions
Kent wrote:
[SNIP]
I'm fine with how SQLA is designed, it isn't really a SQLA
issue, I was
just appealing to you to see if you could think of a workaround I
believe the problem is in the framework tools we are using,
whether it
is Zope or TG. (I've posted to zope group now to see if
From a quick reading of the 'transaction' package source, it looks like
you should be able to create savepoints and roll them back something
like this:
savepoint = transaction.savepoint()
try:
# ...
except:
savepoint.rollback()
raise
Thanks for the interest in helping. I
On May 28, 2010, at 1:24 PM, Kent wrote:
On May 27, 6:39 pm, Michael Bayer mike...@zzzcomputing.com wrote:
commit() releases the savepoint, if thats whats going on contextually. It
doesnt actually commit the outer transaction if you've last called
begin_nested().
In a
On 5/28/2010 10:08 AM, Michael Bayer wrote:
Is the pattern that you want to keep re-issuing a savepoint repeatedly
using the same name ? Does that have some different usage of resources
versus issuing/closing distinct savepoints with different names ?
As an aside, since oracle apparently has
11 matches
Mail list logo
