Ruby on Rails

Comments and changes to this ticket

• 

  Jeremy Kemper June 10th, 2008 @ 10:35 PM

  • → Assigned user changed from “” to “Jeremy Kemper”

  I'd love to support savepoints. We've had the discussion regarding the default behavior of nested transactions, though, and it's not the way to go. Nested transactions should be explicit, otherwise we're going to flood the database with junk transactions that really only mean "include me in a transaction" not "start a new transaction". Let's extend the existing semantics instead of stepping on them. And add better test coverage ;)

• 

  Jeremy Kemper June 10th, 2008 @ 10:35 PM

  • → Milestone changed from “” to “2.2”
• 

  Tarmo Tänav June 16th, 2008 @ 08:02 PM

  Jeremy, the plugin by Jonathan Viney actually does make transaction{} only create a nested transaction if an explicit ":force => true" option is passed to it. The only exception being transactional tests where one additional level of non-explicit transactions can be created (because the test class itself uses the first level).

  So these changes should not change rails behavior outside tests.

  This plugin however does not include the ability to configure rails behavior for implicit transactions (those automatically created by save/destroy). Which means that you will not be able to make some activerecord model always create an implicit transaction for saving itself, even if a higher level transaction already exists. But this is a capability not strictly neccessary for the nested transactions feature to be useful, as you can always create an explicit "transaction :force => true" block around a save if you need it.

• 

  jonathan July 3rd, 2008 @ 01:12 PM

  • → Tag changed from “” to “activerecord nested savepoint transaction”

  I'd like to see #533 included first (moving the transaction counter from Thread.current to the connection object), and then I'll add an updated patch for the savepoints.

• 

  Jeremy Kemper August 30th, 2008 @ 05:10 AM

  • → State changed from “new” to “open”

  #533 is in -- interested in porting your work over to Rails master?

• 

  jonathan August 31st, 2008 @ 11:38 AM

  I've attached a patch for master.

  The handling of increment/decrement_open_transactions has been moved to the connection object rather than handling it in AR::Base.transaction, seemed better to me.

  I've added a transactional_fixtures accessor to the connection which is set by the fixtures. Not the nicest, but I wasn't sure what else to do.

  There are some failures for databases that don't support savepoints (eg. sqlite). These are a bit hard to avoid unless we add a supports_savepoints? to the connection.

  Anyway, this should get the ball rolling.

  • savepoints-3.diff 14.6 KB
• 

  Hongli Lai October 1st, 2008 @ 03:19 PM

  I think ':force => true' is a bit confusing. How about ':nested => true'?

• 

  Hongli Lai October 9th, 2008 @ 12:22 PM

  savepoints-3.diff doesn't apply cleanly om master. Here's an updated patch, with conflicts resolved.

  It doesn't pass the unit tests however. More investigation will be required.

  • savepoints-4.diff 14.6 KB
• 

  Hongli Lai October 9th, 2008 @ 12:25 PM

  Jonathan, is there a reason why you changed

  def transaction(start_db_transaction = false)
  
  

  to

  def transaction(start_db_transaction = false)
  
  

  ?

• 

  Hongli Lai October 9th, 2008 @ 03:27 PM

  Never mind my last message, I already figured it out. :)

  Here's an updated patch which passes all unit tests, for MySQL, PostgreSQL and SQLite3. Changes are:

  • Much improved documentation, including documentation about potential caveats on MySQL.
  • :force option renamed to :nest, which is probably clearer.
  • I had to revert commit 045713ee240fff815edb5962b25d668512649478 by Jeremy Kemper, "PostgreSQL: introduce transaction_active? rather than tracking activity ourselves". It conflicts with the savepoint code.

  • savepoints-5.diff 39 KB
• 

  Hongli Lai October 9th, 2008 @ 05:00 PM

  After speaking with Koz I've reimplemented Jeremy's transaction state introspection feature. The old implementation was incompatible with the old 'postgres' driver, which I fixed. I also added unit tests for this feature.

  • savepoints-6.diff 44.5 KB
• 

  Hongli Lai October 9th, 2008 @ 05:19 PM

  Koz said that it's probably not feasible to include this feature in 2.2, seeing that we're in a feature freeze. If anybody wants to help, I'm maintaining this savepoint stuff in the following git repository:

  git://git.phusion.nl/rails.git branch 'savepoints'

• 

  Pratik October 17th, 2008 @ 05:14 PM

  • → Milestone changed from “2.2” to “2.x”