On May 18, 5:12 pm, Ian Kelly wrote:
> Yes, it was reason a). Transactions aren't automatically invalidated
> after an IntegrityError, as far as I was able to determine.
Thanks Ian. Ticket #11156 records the current inefficiency on Oracle.
Cheers,
Richard.
--~--~-~--~~~
On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 2:50 AM, Richard Davies
wrote:
>
> Matt Boersma wrote:
>> I think Malcolm implemented this in the Oracle backend rather than Ian
>> K. or myself.
>
> It was Ian Kelly, I think in [10022].
>
>> So I'd say the answer is a).
>
> If that's right, then we have an inefficiency o
Matt Boersma wrote:
> I think Malcolm implemented this in the Oracle backend rather than Ian
> K. or myself.
It was Ian Kelly, I think in [10022].
> So I'd say the answer is a).
If that's right, then we have an inefficiency on Oracle at present -
the uses_savepoints flag is used both to signal
> was [8961] in September 2008!), which would imply that Oracle
> savepoints were implemented for reason (a) to add the feature rather
> than reason (b) by necessity.
I think Malcolm implemented this in the Oracle backend rather than Ian
K. or myself. The test suite has been passing all but
My question is effectively the same as asking if the test suite passed
on Oracle between [8314] in August 2008 and [10022] in March 2009.
I assume that it must have passed during those six months (Django 1.0
was [8961] in September 2008!), which would imply that Oracle
savepoints were
Calling any Oracle developer (Matt Boersma?, Ian Kelly?),
I see that the Oracle backend has had savepoint support since [10022]
in March.
I'd like to understand whether this was done:
a) simply to add the feature (which is good!)
b) "by necessity" to be able to perform savepoint rollback when a
