Tyson Lloyd Thwaites wrote:
> I am not opposed to introducing checkpoints to our API, but it would be
> nicer if I didn't have to. At the moment I have resigned myself to
> turning off spring declarative txns for certain methods, and handling
> them manually by doing multiple txn blocks. In the above example
> however, the bit that I want to allow to fail is inside a method that
> would have to be wrapped in a transaction.... .... see the web of
> complexity that is growing?
Isn't the 'try' statement rather similar to a 'savepoint' command? I
realize it would be difficult to override the behaviour of try {...}
catch (...) {...}, but it shouldn't be too hard to wrap it somehow for
exceptions in database code.
--
Alban Hertroys
alban@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
magproductions b.v.
T: ++31(0)534346874
F: ++31(0)534346876
M:
I: www.magproductions.nl
A: Postbus 416
7500 AK Enschede
// Integrate Your World //
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
match
