[whatwg] Question on handling of failed statements in database API
ian at hixie.ch
Mon Feb 25 15:13:10 PST 2008
On Mon, 25 Feb 2008, Aaron Boodman wrote:
> Quick request for clarification on how to handle failed statements.
> The spec says (4.11.6 - step 12):
> Call the error callback with a newly constructed SQLError object that
> represents the last error to have occured in this transaction. If the
> error callback returned false, and the last error wasn't itself a
> failure when committing the transaction, then try to commit the
> transaction. If that fails, or if the callback couldn't be called
> (e.g. the method was called with only one argument), or if it didn't
> return false, then rollback the transaction. Any still-pending
> statements in the transaction are discarded.
> So let's say:
> - a statement fails
So we're in the "In case of error" steps under "4.11.6 Processing model",
> - we call the statement error handler, and it does not return false
So we jump to step 12.
> - we call the transaction error handler, and it returns false
So now we have checked, and the author wants the transaction committed
> - we attempt to commit, and the commit fails
> It seems like at this point, the proposal says that we should just
> silently fail. (That is, don't call the transaction failure callback
> again). It seems like this loses information. The commit may fail for
> some other reason that why the statement failed.
> What do people think of changing the proposal to remove
> SQLTransactionErrorCallback's return value. It seems like whatever you'd
> want to do with it, you could do with SQLStatementErrorCallback.
> Granted, you might have to have an error callback for every statement,
> but I feel like ignoring failed statements is kinda an edge case.
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
More information about the whatwg