Hi, Jim. I'm saying the same thing as you, albeit in a slightly different way. Whether a "workflow" or "unit of work", the transaction needs to be identifiable via a unique resource (URI) that provides the context for related invocations of other services and, of course, for completion and cleanup of the resource when done with the unit of work.
Also, most of the transactional activities won't have a return, per se. Merely success or failure. We can certainly use HTTP result codes to handle these. Cheers, Rick -----Original Message----- From: user-boun...@lists.neo4j.org [mailto:user-boun...@lists.neo4j.org] On Behalf Of Jim Webber Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2010 9:14 AM To: Neo user discussions Subject: Re: [Neo] Transactions in Neo4j REST Server Hi fellow graph-tastic people, Allowing a transaction to span multiple requests was ruled out in the early version of the REST API. It's a dangerous pattern that allows for inadvertent (or even malicious) denial of service. If we're going to build systems that sympathetic to the Web, then exposing transactions like this is not the way to go. Having said that, the REST API will need more functionality and that new functionality will need to address transactionality, but it will need to do so in a way that doesn't compromise its Web-iness. Rick's response is one approach, where a transaction is modelled as a resource; another approach might be to submit a transactional "workflow" through the API and get a result graph/set back. I promise I'll do some work on the API again soon. So start yelling your requirements and I'll prioritise them (and will ignore the ones that are too hard for me to implement, naturally :-) Jim _______________________________________________ Neo mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user _______________________________________________ Neo mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
