remote/sqlite-utils
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils.git synced 2026-07-23 01:14:31 +02:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity

Clarify that db.atomic() is fine inside transactional migrations

Browse source 
The manual-transaction warning could be read as covering
db.atomic() too. Nested atomic() blocks are safe - they become
savepoints inside the migration's transaction, preserving the
all-or-nothing rollback guarantee.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01UnLnhsH25Nnv7LHhekUfPd
This commit is contained in:
Claude 2026-07-04 22:20:37 +00:00
commit ff76fb7740
No known key found for this signature in database
1 changed files with 1 additions and 1 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

2
docs/migrations.rst
View file

@ -87,7 +87,7 @@ Some operations cannot run inside a transaction, for example ``VACUUM`` or chang
A migration registered with ``transactional=False`` runs without a wrapping transaction, so if it fails part way through any changes it already made will not be rolled back, and re-applying will run the whole function again.
Avoid calling ``db.conn.commit()`` or otherwise managing transactions manually inside a transactional migration - register the migration with ``transactional=False`` if it needs to control its own transactions.
Avoid calling ``db.conn.commit()`` or otherwise managing transactions manually inside a transactional migration - register the migration with ``transactional=False`` if it needs to control its own transactions. Using ``with db.atomic():`` blocks inside a migration is fine: they nest as savepoints within the migration's transaction, so the migration as a whole still commits or rolls back as a single unit. See :ref:`python_api_transactions`.
Applying migrations using the CLI
=================================