----- Original Message -----
From: "Alexandre Benson Smith" <iblist@...>
To: <Firebird-Architect@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2004 11:06 PM
Subject: Re: [Firebird-Architect] Feature request...


>
> When I said "I wish" nested transactions is because the objects starts
> and ends the transaction (commit or rollback) by itself, since those
> objects has functionality alone, when those objects was used inside a
> more complex object, the "parent" object should control transaction
> too, and rollback or commit the entire process.
>
<snip...>

I think concept of transaction implementation do not belong to any of your
objects. I have some experience in tha.
and wouldn't use start and end transaction calls in any objects except of
the most 'outer' ones.
And again. Can anybody find any usefull application for "nested
transaction". It looks like interesting theory but after closer
consideration it's turn to be empty and dumb. Am I right ? Jim, what do you
think ?

Alexander


>
>
> see you !
>
> --
>
> Alexandre Benson Smith
> Development
> THOR Software e Comercial Ltda.
> Santo Andre - Sao Paulo - Brazil
> www.thorsoftware.com.br
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> E1-I: This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by
UML's antivirus scanning services.
>
>
>