Return-Path: 
 <ojb-dev-return-6222-apmail-db-ojb-dev-archive=db.apache.org@db.apache.org>
Delivered-To: apmail-db-ojb-dev-archive@www.apache.org
Received: (qmail 22456 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2003 14:00:55 -0000
Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (208.185.179.12)
  by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 12 Nov 2003 14:00:55 -0000
Received: (qmail 36896 invoked by uid 500); 12 Nov 2003 14:00:50 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-db-ojb-dev-archive@db.apache.org
Received: (qmail 36873 invoked by uid 500); 12 Nov 2003 14:00:50 -0000
Mailing-List: contact ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:ojb-dev-subscribe@db.apache.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:ojb-dev@db.apache.org>
List-Id: "OJB Developers List" <ojb-dev.db.apache.org>
Reply-To: "OJB Developers List" <ojb-dev@db.apache.org>
Delivered-To: mailing list ojb-dev@db.apache.org
Received: (qmail 36859 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2003 14:00:50 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mailout11.sul.t-online.com) (194.25.134.85)
  by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 12 Nov 2003 14:00:50 -0000
Received: from fwd00.aul.t-online.de
	by mailout11.sul.t-online.com with smtp
	id 1AJvYA-00029r-04; Wed, 12 Nov 2003 15:00:50 +0100
Received: from code-au-lait.de
 (S94E80ZeYeOxGvEQ9AZNDCIGNcgijHvruvOtt1I1gqKgqv559Ugk0c@[80.145.102.13]) by
 fmrl00.sul.t-online.com
	with esmtp id 1AJvY5-1vGYAS0; Wed, 12 Nov 2003 15:00:45 +0100
Message-ID: <3FB23D04.908@code-au-lait.de>
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 15:00:36 +0100
From: Armin Waibel <armin@code-au-lait.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US;
 rv:1.5) Gecko/20031013 Thunderbird/0.3
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: OJB Developers List <ojb-dev@db.apache.org>
Subject: Do we really need LoadedObjectsRegistry?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Seen: false
X-ID: S94E80ZeYeOxGvEQ9AZNDCIGNcgijHvruvOtt1I1gqKgqv559Ugk0c@t-dialin.net
X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N
X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N

Hi all,

while try to fix an odmg test case I
stumble across LoadedObjectRegistry (LOR)used
in the odmg-api.
A comment in this class says:

<snip>
* This is a helper class which registers all objects loaded
  * from database. It is used by ODMG layer to determine the state of
  * objects: if an object was not loaded from database then it is new.
  * Note: objects remain registered even after they are deleted. This
  * is necessary to prevent creation of deleted objects by another
  * thread, see <a 
href="http://archives.apache.org/eyebrowse/ReadMsg?listId=106&msgNo=1382">this<a>
  * for details.
  *
</snip>

I read (is this the same message?)
http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/ReadMsg?listName=ojb-user@db.apache.org&msgNo=1382

and found

http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/ReadMsg?listName=ojb-user@db.apache.org&msgNo=1453

so LoadedObjectRegistry was not needed to solve this problem.

<snip>
  * is necessary to prevent creation of deleted objects by another
  * thread
</snip>
I think this problem couldn't be solved by LoadedObjectRegistry.
If an application server is used all objects will be serialized
and we never will find the "same" object in LOR.
Or in an clustered environment this will not work too, because
LOR is not a distributed service.


But if I comment out LOR the test case will be fixed.

Any arguments against removing this service?

regards,
Armin



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org