Mark Ramm schrieb: >>> Currently, I had to be sure of the DB integrity by myself, which is >>> not really effective. My question is: Is there any possibility to >>> commit the session without clearing it in the same time? >> Nope. This is unfortunately a side-effect of the zope-transactions used. >> I personally think about ditching repoze.tm and start using "classic" >> SA-sessions in a homegrown middleware. That would have the benefit that >> you could open up subtransactions. > > Subtransactions are supported by repoze.tm, though we haven't > documented how to use them at all.
How so? I tried invoking begin nested (which works with SA-sessions, provided the DB supports it of course), and that simply silently commits the ongoing transaction, and creates a new one. Did I miss something? > And, it wouldn't be very hard to write a different transaction handler > than the one in zope.sqlalchemy if your needs differ from the > standard. zope.sqlalchemy is a nice thing for us because it provides a > resaonable semi-standard, but there's not that much code there so it's > easy enough to look at what they've done and then go off to do your > own thing. Yeah, probably will do. For example, just today I saw that the cleanup-actions don't get anything passed to them - not even if the transaction was commited, or rolled back. That sure could be enhanced. Or replaced. Diez --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TurboGears" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/turbogears?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
