Roll back invalid object creations not handled by realm.write()
#6356
Conversation
| export type ObjCreator = () => [binding.Obj, boolean]; | ||
| export type ObjCreator = () => [binding.Obj, boolean, binding.TableRef?]; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Given that it's now 3 values, we could choose to return an object instead to clarify the return values.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I agree, this is approaching (if its not already in) the territory that needs an object 👍
In this specific case, we might not need to pass the TableRef here at all, but we could instead pass a "rollback", "revert" or "delete" function, taking no arguments, which will call table.removeObject(obj.key).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is the TableRef really optional? Maybe i'm overlooking something, but the creator seems to always return a TableRef.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
..but we could instead pass a "rollback", "revert" or "delete" function, taking no arguments..
Interesting, yeah that seems more appropriate given that that's the only reason for passing the table 🙂
Is the
TableRefreally optional?
The creator defined on the Object class will always return the table, but for embedded objects, a custom createObj() method will be passed as part of the CreationContext. As those parts have not been modified, the table ref needed to be optional in this case.
What, How & Why?
Trying to create an invalid object (e.g. missing required properties) via
realm.create()or aRealm.Objectconstructor would both throw and create the object (with default values for required properties), causing the object creation to not be rolled back in the following cases:realm.write()and does not rethrow it.This PR updates it so that the individual operation is automatically rolled back.
This closes #2638.
It also sets up somewhat related tests (currently
.skiped) that can be enabled once #6355 is fixed.☑️ ToDos