| From: | Christophe Pettus <xof(at)thebuild(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Psycopg <psycopg(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Karsten Hilbert <Karsten(dot)Hilbert(at)gmx(dot)net>, Paolo De Stefani <paolo(at)paolodestefani(dot)it>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Daniele Varrazzo <daniele(dot)varrazzo(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: psycopg3 transactions |
| Date: | 2021-10-21 16:22:07 |
| Message-ID: | 1A345ABA-0509-46DF-900C-BA0296ADD5A9@thebuild.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | psycopg |
> On Oct 21, 2021, at 09:18, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
> But yes, the biggest issue I have with it is the part that's outlined in the Warning section of the docs there -- using it in different ways provides completely and fundamentally different behaviour in a way that can cause bad data.
>
> Things would be a lot more clear if the *connection* context didn't do *anything* with transactions whatsoever, and the *transaction* one did all of it. When it comes to transactions, explicit is always better than implicit IMNSHO.
+1. I have to say that had I not read the warning, the behavior would have taken me by surprise, even with a lot of psycopg2 experience.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Daniele Varrazzo | 2021-11-15 15:56:10 | Psycopg 2.9.2, 3.0.4 released |
| Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2021-10-21 16:18:43 | Re: Re: psycopg3 transactions |