db-jdo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Craig Russell (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] Commented: (JDO-624) Query behaviour independent of transactional boundaries
Date Fri, 20 Feb 2009 17:51:01 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-624?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12675411#action_12675411

Craig Russell commented on JDO-624:

This request seems to affect several areas of the specification, including optimistic vs.
datastore transaction, transaction isolation level, and for JDBC implementations of JDO, the
handling of the JDBC connection and statement holdability across commit.

I think a bit more behavior needs to be specified than a note in 14.3. Could you please be
more specific as to what the behavior should be?

> Query behaviour independent of transactional boundaries
> -------------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: JDO-624
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-624
>             Project: JDO
>          Issue Type: Bug
>    Affects Versions: JDO 2 maintenance release 2
>            Reporter: Christiaan
> (see also http://www.nabble.com/NonTransactionalRead---Query-Fetchplan-to19875446.html)
> I have a question about the behaviour of Queries after a commit when "NonTransactionalRead"
is set to true. Should a Query behave like it did before the commit? More specifically, when
defining a fetchsize in the FetchPlan I would like to see that the Query is still honouring
this fetchsize after a commit is given.This behaviour is not explicitly described in the specification.
> The scenario I am working with is as such: 
> I have set NonTransactionRead=true and Multithreaded=true. I have 1 pm, and 2 threads.
Thread 1 performs reads (executing queries with large result set) and Thread 2 performs writes.
Now when I am iterating over a large query in Thread 1 and Thread 2 is doing a commit, I don't
want this to affect the iterating over the query in Thread 1. 
> My proposal would be that the behaviour of the query should be unchanged by a commit().
For me this currently a portability issue, since our application depend on the fact that the
query behaves the same. May be the following note to 14.3 Architecture of Query would be sufficient:

> "The behaviour of a query should not depend on transactional boundaries"? 

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

View raw message