François Revol<revol@xxxxxxx> wrote: > Le 31/10/2011 18:39, Axel Dörfler a écrit : > >> + Transaction transaction(this, fRootNode->BlockNumber()); > >> + fRootNode->WriteLockInTransaction(transaction); [...] > > Besides, this is all wrong: it should get the transaction from its > > caller, or else this won't work right when called from the initializer. > That I was wondering, but since in one place it has a transaction opened > already and another not... On second thought (after another look at the code), the transaction should actually automatically become a child transaction of the current transaction (if any). So this should actually work fine -- I assume you have tested the outcome of the patch, at least to found my understanding of the code I wrote a while back with more substance? :-) Bye, Axel.