@iagwanderson I'm not sure it's a bug or not

but I think what's happening is that conn-from-datoms is not the same as conn + transact!

rather, it's the same as getting all the datoms from an existing conn and giving them to another

and since an existing conn has no retractions expressed in its datom set, conn-from-datoms doesn't account for it

so maybe it's a bug, maybe not, depends on the intended semantics

I'd open an issue for it in your case and let the author chime in

if I had to bet, there isn't much of a reason to make conn-from-datoms behave as transactions though

that would slow it down

and you can already just do transactions anyway

@filipematossilva thanks for the explanation, I will make a small reproducible case for this scenario and open an issue to debate with more concrete information