db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel John Debrunner <...@apache.org>
Subject Clean up commit/rollback code at language/jdbc level by moving to a oo based callback scheme??
Date Wed, 21 Mar 2007 03:29:25 GMT
In looking at how to solve DERBY-2380 I've been looking closely at the 
DependencyManager. It handles the rollback of a statement or transaction 
in two different and not obviously related ways. One is to add 
dependency information into the statement context and have the statement 
context remove them from the dependency manager on statement (and 
transaction) rollback. Then a different mechanism is used for a 
transaction rollback in some situations where a invalidate "message" is 
sent with action rollback.

Then I happened to notice that the new LOB locator (?) work has added a 
call to clearLOBMapping() call to every commit() and rollback() in 

Then GenericLanguageConnection also has a collection of work it performs 
in its doRollback() and doCommit() methods, such as dropping temp tables 

This all seems somewhat haphazard and prone to bugs, for example most of 
the rollback actions in the LCC are prior to the store commit, but the 
clearLOBMapping() is after the store commit. Other possibilities are the 
cleanup only been added to rollback and not commit, or vice versa, or 
even not being added for XA transactions, which may be the case for 
This approach also imposes a performance penalty on all transactions, 
even if they do no LOB or temp table work for example. And that 
performance will degrade over time as more actions are added.

I was wondering if a callback system might be better. The LCC would 
provide an api where objects could be added and have methods called on 
rollback, commit or statement rollback. This then would make the 
commit/rollback methods very clean, and ensure that the object was 
notified in all situations, rather than relying on the coder to add in 
all the various locations. Performance should be better as if there are 
no LOBs or temp tables (or whatever) then the list would be empty rather 
than having to explicit check that each type (LOBs, temp tables, log 
statement text, DDL transaction) has no cleanup action to perform.

The object that would be added to the callback list would implement some 
interface, maybe something like:

interface CommitAction
   // called when a transaction is about to be rolled back
   // (before the store executes it physical rollback)
   void preRollback() throws StandardException;

   // called when a transaction is about to be committed
   // (before the store executes it commit (force of log records))
   void preCommit() throws StandardException;

   // to support statement/savepoint rollback.
   void preSavepointRollback() throws StandardException;

That's to give a general idea, it probably would go through several 
iterations, e.g. return boolean to indicate if remove from list?
Also the behaviour of this callback scheme should be carefully defined 
up front, e.g. is order guaranteed, what happens if an exception is 
thrown by a preCommit(), which methods are called & when, when is the 
object removed, etc.

This could be added incrementally, the framework first and the callback 
logic and then retrofitting the various end transaction actions that 
exist today to use the callback mechanism.

Thoughts, comments?
PS. not sure if it will help me with DEBRY-2380, but it would clean up 
the dependency manager, which would be a help.

View raw message