feat: no tx migration #3159
Closed
feat: no tx migration #3159
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Would you be willing to discuss using a flag in a SQL comment as opposed to adding more semantics to filenames? I did bring that up as a concern in the linked comment. I was thinking the parsing could be as simple as |
|
Yeah that's cool too, I picked what I thought made more sense for me but like I said in the issue I am still very new to this project/rust and by no means thinking my way is the right way here, I'm happy to learn and help wherever I can. I will update the change to use the comment in the file contents instead, please let me know if there are any other suggestions/feedback on the rest of the PR 🙂 |
|
@abonander updated the change, let me know if this works |
kujeger
reviewed
Apr 4, 2024
cleverjam
force-pushed
the
767-no-tx-migration
branch
from
b5d8db6 to
3e7aa6b
Compare
Merged
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Does your PR solve an issue?
Yes, this change allows for a way to create migrations that will be executed outside of the postgres transaction block.
It works as described in this comment
fixes #767