On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 3:51 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny <elecharny@gmail.com> wrote:

I'm fixing tests in core-integ, and so far, I still have some issues in uathz (SearchAuthorizationIT) and in schema. All the other tests are now passing.

I have moved the txns borders into the OperationManager, and for searches, the cursor commit or abort the txn in the close() and close(exception) methods.

Why is the OM better than the CoreSession? Just curious what made you choose this route. Forgive me if this was discussed in an earlier email.

I think we should find a way to implicitely commit or abort the txns even if the user does not close() the cursors, otherwise it might be extremely painful for them. I was thinking about adding a finalaizer in the cursor to finish the txns, but it's not a perfect solution (as it depends on the GC to be executed.

Oh please don't do this - we should be able to find a better solution I am sure. There are a myriad of reasons why this is a bad idea IMHO. We can discuss this once I settle down in one place .. .still traveling.
Damn I miss the C++ explicit destuctors :/).
Something more useful would be to allow any txns to reuse an existing txns.

YES this is what we need to do for re-entry but there may need to be some configurable parameter for this.

Maybe we can Skype on this to be fast and report back to the ML.
Of course, there are some drawbacks, but I think it's probably a better approach.


Best Regards,
-- Alex