Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:114031
To: internals@lists.php.net
References: <CAF+90c_PyPCd0ndtvZocJwD73_sxgxQYsOiAw8V5tSjTH3oR1A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1ffb0fbf-43f9-274a-37e0-8b650c02042b@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2021 14:43:32 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAF+90c_PyPCd0ndtvZocJwD73_sxgxQYsOiAw8V5tSjTH3oR1A@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Allow commit() without transaction?
From: dik.takken@gmail.com (Dik Takken)

On 12-04-2021 14:07, Nikita Popov wrote:
> I believe this behavior is correct, but I could see an argument made in
> favor of always allowing commit() calls (but not rollBack() calls) even if
> there is no active transaction. That would change the meaning of commit()
> from "commit an active transaction" towards "commit if an active
> transaction exists".
> 
> Any opinions on that?
> 

I think it is really nice that commit() throws for inactive
transactions. Code paths that mess up your transactions will not go
unnoticed that easily.

My preference would be to have a separate commit method or a method
parameter to explicitly allow committing without an active transaction.

Regards,
Dik Takken