Re: PEAR::DB destructors and uncommitted transactions

# smith@backendmedia.com / 2003-06-05 15:34:27 +0200: > > From: 'Roman Neuhauser' [mailto:neuhauser@bellavista.cz] > > Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 3:29 PM > > > > # smith@backendmedia.com / 2003-06-05 15:08:05 +0200: > > > MDB does 1) ... I have not tested it as much as I probably should > > > however. > > > > I'm not sure I made myself clear with 1). What I meant was that it > > could be stated that rolling back outstanding transactions in the > > request shutdown stage is not a goal for PEAR::DB::*, and users > > should subclass the drivers instead. > > > > Is that what you got from reading the sentence? I don't know MDB. > > Hmm, no I didnt. ok, I'm glad I could make myself clear. > But I should probably look at your patch first before making further > comments. easy: it's, what, 27 lines including the diff(1) noise. :) > PS: I didn't want to confuse you with the reference to MDB. It is > basically an alternative abstraction layer we have in PEAR. Another clarification: I know what MDB is and where it comes from. I've just never used it. -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message. see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html