#33882: Allow transaction.atomic to work in async contexts.
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: alex | Owner:
| rajdesai24
Type: New feature | Status: assigned
Component: Database layer | Version: 4.0
(models, ORM) |
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: async | Triage Stage: Accepted
Has patch: 0 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by Mike Lissner):
I'm quite bad at async things generally, but I thought I'd chime in to say
that I'm surprised async atomic transactions aren't more of a priority. A
few of the comments above seem to imply that this isn't an important
feature or that it's an antipattern (maybe?).
I just turned down part of a PR where a developer is converting our code
to async because to do so required that we drop the @transaction.atomic
decorator. I said, "Sorry, we can't covert this to async because given
the choice between correctness and performance, I have to choose
correctness."
Am I missing something big — Isn't this a big gap in Django's support for
real applications converting fully to async?
Thanks all, sorry I don't have more to add! If I were better at async, I'd
take a crack at actually fixing it.
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/33882#comment:14>
Django <https://code.djangoproject.com/>
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/0107018ac31c9484-ac7bfdba-b162-4a66-9c61-ad67076ba611-000000%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.
