Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merge 3.9.x up into 3.10.x #6584

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Nov 4, 2024
Merged

Merge 3.9.x up into 3.10.x #6584

merged 5 commits into from
Nov 4, 2024

Conversation

greg0ire
Copy link
Member

@greg0ire greg0ire commented Nov 4, 2024

No description provided.

simPod and others added 5 commits October 31, 2024 17:07
…6563)

|      Q       |   A
|------------- | -----------
| Type         | improvement
| Fixed issues | <!-- use #NUM format to reference an issue -->

#### Summary

Covers the concern expressed by @greg0ire
#6545 (comment)

This ensures the transaction is (not)active based on `autocommmit` mode
when interacting with `transactional()`.
… transaction

Let's get rid of There's no active transaction exception which occurs e.g. when using deferred constraints so the violation is checked at the end of the transaction and not during it.

- Do not rollback only on exceptions where we know the transaction is no longer active
- Introduce TransactionRolledBack exception
- Transform Oracle's "transaction rolled back" exception and use the underlying one that DBAL supports
Right now, the Codecov UI displays downloads in a confusing way:
You get an "appveyor" header, and then 2 list items with links to
appveyor, followed by one list item with a link to Github.

We didn't specify that appveyor name anywhere, maybe Codecov behaves
differently on that platform. Let us see if specifying names for each
system makes things clearer.
Distinguish between Appveyor and github-action
Fix incorrect `transactional()` handling when DB auto-rolled back the transaction
@greg0ire greg0ire merged commit bb23c9d into 3.10.x Nov 4, 2024
190 of 194 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants