On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 2:42 AM, Maciej
Jaros<egil(a)wp.pl> wrote:
I think it still should be conscious decision and
so those functions
could use their first... hm... second parameter as the transaction name.
For MS SQL you can simply use BEGIN TRANSACTION [name] (I think it would
be more natural), for MySQL I guess savepoints should be used.
I'm not sure
what you're saying here. Are you suggesting some
solution where commit() does not actually always commit the current
transaction? If so, as I said, this is a problem because it will
cause locks to be held for much too long in some cases.
Not exactly. If you know
you can and should commit transaction called
for example "article_update" then it's OK. If you want to commit
"image_insert_and_update" then it's OK too. If you are making a commit
for everything that is started then it doesn't seem OK as pointed out by
Platonides in his example.