- From: Aaron Boodman <aa@google.com>
- Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2007 13:49:44 -0700
On Sep 20, 2007 1:14 PM, Timothy Hatcher <timothy at apple.com> wrote: > The pain of asynchronous access can be alleviated or even solved with an > API for transactions, or a group of SQL queries that need be executed in > order. Commonly, if a transaction fails in the middle, the database > is rolled-back to the state before the transaction started. > It sounds like what you're talking about is something like: var tx = new Transaction(); tx.addStatement("insert into accounts values (?, ?)", ["foo", "bar"]); tx.addStatement("update persons set name = ?, age = ?", ["bob", 42]); tx.executeAsync(callback, errback); This only works so long as you can construct all the sql calls ahead of time. If any calls depend on the results of previous ones, you need something like a worker. But I agree that the api needs support for transactions, I wanted to start another thread about that. - a > There can then be a callback when the transaction finished or fails, with > details on what query failed. > > On Sep 20, 2007, at 10:13 AM, Aaron Boodman wrote: > > That said, it will be even more common with databases to have multiple > asynchronous operations in a row than it is today with XHR. Doing this all > asynchronously will be incredibly painful. > > > ? Timothy Hatcher > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20070920/913f3ee0/attachment.htm>
Received on Thursday, 20 September 2007 13:49:44 UTC