From: Carl Youngblood <carl@...>
Date: 2004-06-05T00:44:52+09:00
Subject: Re: [ANN] Active Record 0.8.0: Transaction that!

Gavin Kistner wrote:

> On Jun 2, 2004, at 9:34 AM, Carl Youngblood wrote:
>
>> David Heinemeier Hansson wrote:
>>
>>> Be aware, though, that the objects will not have their instance 
>>> data  returned to their state before the transaction started. You�ll 
>>> have to  deal with that yourself (just as in the case of 
>>> Validations). Also have  in mind that exceptions thrown within a 
>>> transaction block will be  propagated (after triggering the 
>>> ROLLBACK), so you should be ready to  catch those in your 
>>> application code.
>>
>>
>> Is this for performance reasons?  It seems like it wouldn't be too 
>> hard to undo the changes to instance data if an exception were thrown.
>
>
> I could actually see an usefulness to the current 
> (non-instance-rollback) mechanism:
>
> If the transaction fails, your code can look at various instances and 
> see which ones worked (the instance is the same as what you attempted 
> to set it to) and thus at which point exactly it failed (the instance 
> never got set). 

Didn't David say that you can still do it the old way by just not 
passing parameters?  So your problem is already solved.

Carl