-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 8
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
Add a single transaction rule #12
Comments
Thanks for reporting this! I'm not sure static code analysis is the best approach to solving this, but perhaps we could take a stab at it. Are you open to work on this? A good name for this rule might be |
Well, in the code fix I mentioned, static code analysis wouldn't do it. However, such a rule would be useful in most cases and I would love to work on this, but keep in mind:
I had a first look on a rule implementation and saw there's some documentation also. What do you recommend ? Start implementing (test, then code) and read docs when stucked, or read docs first ? |
Hey, sorry for not getting back to you. Did you get started on this? Don't worry about this being your first time. It's not as hard as it might seem. A great tip is to use ASTExplorer (configured with espree and ESLint V4) to explore and experiment with the AST. Let me know if I can help. If you don't have time, just let me know 😊 |
I didn't start yet, but with this feedback I can go on ! |
Two years went by, I'm better choosing an easier rule ! |
🦄 Problem
Knex implements explicit transactions, but allow to mix
Such a code would not be implemented purposefully, and may end up exhausting the connection pool
Such an issue has been raised in knex repo
🤖 Solution
Implement a rule that does not allow mixing transactions
🌈 Remarks
Such a behavior occurred in production in this repository yesterday, blocking hundred of thousand of users
FYI, the original fix is here
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: