in reply to Re^2: Poor man's transaction construct
in thread Poor man's transaction construct
the rollback should die if a step dies..or you will quite possibly be undoing things that cannot be undone if the prior (undo) step failed. automatically undoing with commands like "rm -r -f dirname" should not (in my opinion) be ever run automatically, and as part of an undo sequence even more dangerous.
i think it is a bit ambitious to be constructing code to automatically undo other code. the original (non-undo) code fails for some unknown reason, which was not catered for in the code...so how does one then produce undo code that should be even more robust?
also the entire undo sequence does not need to follow exactly every step of normal run code. if the normal code creates a db, then creates tables, and then populates those..the undo should be merely a drop db. so if you absolutely must write this code, by grouping certain steps linked to a single undo step, it will be more robust by virtue of fewer undo steps code to run.
i think it is a bit ambitious to be constructing code to automatically undo other code. the original (non-undo) code fails for some unknown reason, which was not catered for in the code...so how does one then produce undo code that should be even more robust?
also the entire undo sequence does not need to follow exactly every step of normal run code. if the normal code creates a db, then creates tables, and then populates those..the undo should be merely a drop db. so if you absolutely must write this code, by grouping certain steps linked to a single undo step, it will be more robust by virtue of fewer undo steps code to run.
the hardest line to type correctly is: stty erase ^H
|
|---|
In Section
Seekers of Perl Wisdom