[Dbix-class] Re: SELECT .. FOR ... (and other db-specific clauses).

Matt S Trout dbix-class at trout.me.uk
Sat Jul 7 18:50:32 GMT 2007

On Sun, Jul 08, 2007 at 01:51:50AM +0900, Daisuke Maki wrote:
> >Looks fairly reasonable. Why are you calling it 'locking' instead of 'for' 
> >?
> Absolutely no reason, I just used the naming used in the original post 
> that I based my initial changes on.
> I suppose
>   $schema->resultset('Foo')->search(
>      { ... },
>      {
>         for => 'update'
>      }
>   );
> Is fair, but within DBIC::SQL::Abstract, it would still be called 
> 'locking' or 'for_locking' or something like that, otherwise it wouldn't 
> make sense.
> But that seems like a style matter, and in this particular context I 
> don't have a strong preference either way.

"locking => 'update'" just jarred me a bit. If we're going to call it
locking we should probably do 'exclusive' versus 'shared' ...

How about "lock_for => 'update'", "lock_for => 'shared'" ?

That could be uniform through the whole thing -and- seems semantically sane.


      Matt S Trout       Need help with your Catalyst or DBIx::Class project?
   Technical Director    Want a managed development or deployment platform?
 Shadowcat Systems Ltd.  Contact mst (at) shadowcatsystems.co.uk for a quote
http://chainsawblues.vox.com/             http://www.shadowcatsystems.co.uk/ 

More information about the Dbix-class mailing list