Stuck on an issue?

Lightrun Answers was designed to reduce the constant googling that comes with debugging 3rd party libraries. It collects links to all the places you might be looking at while hunting down a tough bug.

And, if you’re still stuck at the end, we’re happy to hop on a call to see how we can help out.

atomic() does not seem to have lock_type argument on 3.13.0

See original GitHub issue

Hi !

We’re using peewee on our project and we are using it with an IMMEDIATE lock type, as: db.atomic(lock_type="IMMEDIATE")

Everything was working fine on the 3.12.0, but now we have this error:

TypeError: atomic() got an unexpected keyword argument 'lock_type'

Any idea why ?

Issue Analytics

State:
Created 4 years ago
Reactions:1
Comments:5 (3 by maintainers)

Top GitHub Comments

2reactions

coleifercommented, Dec 6, 2019

https://github.com/coleifer/peewee/releases/tag/3.13.1

0reactions

JeanBarrierecommented, Dec 6, 2019

Thank you for the fast update

Top Results From Across the Web

The trouble with transaction.atomic - David Seddon

How does it work? Under the hood, Django begins a database transaction when transaction.atomic is entered, and does not commit it until the ......

peewee/CHANGELOG.md at master - GitHub

Fix a regression when specifying keyword arguments to the atomic() or transaction() helper methods. Note: this only occurs if you were using Sqlite...

Why does .save() still take up time when using transaction ...

1 Answer 1 ... There is probably just a misunderstanding here about what transaction.atomic actually does. It doesn't necessarily wait to execute ...

Package List — Spack 0.20.0.dev0 documentation

This is a list of things you can install using Spack. It is automatically generated based on the packages in this Spack version....

Database transactions | Django documentation

atomic takes a using argument which should be the name of a database. If this argument isn't provided, Django uses the "default" database....